I 


LIBRARY 

OF  THE 

University  of  California. 

RECEIVED    BY   EXCHANGE 


Class 


^:.n.  ^rr\<i\ 


The  Doctrines  of  Herbart  in 
the  United  States 


A  THESIS 

Presented   to   the   Graduate   School   of   the   University 

of  Pennsylvania,  in  partial  fulfilment  of  the 

requirements  for  the  degree  of  Doctor 

of  Philosophy 


GEORGE  BASIL  RAN  DELS 


The  Doctrines  of  Herbart  in  the 
United  States 


A  THESIS 

Presented  to  the   Graduate   School  of  the    University 

of  Pennsylvania,  in  partial  fulfilment  of  the 

requirements  for  the  degree  of  Doctor 

of  Philosophy 


BY 

GEORGE  BASIL  RANDELS 


•  •  •  •  • 
«    •    * 


l-Ti 


<iM 


KS 


•  • 


'•  -•«  »    «  •  • 


CONTENTS 

Introduction                        .             .             .             .  .5 

Chapter  I.     A  Sketch  of  Pre-Herbartian  Pedagogy  .       7 

Chapter  II.     The  Herbartian  Movement  in  America  .     16 

Chapter  III.     The  Educational  Aim,  the  Aim  of  Instruction 

and  the  Course  of  Study        .             .             .  .     26 

Chapter  IV.     The  Doctrine  of  Apperception         .  .     32 

Chapter  V.     The  Doctrine  of  Interest       .             .  .     35 

Chapter  VI.     The  Doctrine  of  Correlation          .  .     40 

Chapter  VII.     The  Doctrine  of  the  Culture  Epochs  .     48 

Chapter  VIII.     The  Doctrine  of  the  Formal  Steps  .     55 

Chapter  IX.     Conclusion   .             .            ,  60 


228317 


Digitized  by  the  Internet  Archive 

in  2007  with  funding  from 

IVIicrosoft  Corporation 


http://www.archive.org/details/doctrinesofherbaOOrandrich 


The  Doctrines  of  Herbari:  in  the  United  States 


INTRODUCTION 

The  Herbartianism  which  has  influenced  American  edu- 
cational thought  and  practice  is  Herbart  as  found  in  the 
interpretation  of  Stoy,  Frick,  Ziller,  and  Rein — most  par- 
ticularly the  latter  two.  The  designation  Herbart-Stoy- 
Ziller-Rein  pedagogy  is  found  quite  frequently  in  American 
educational  literature. 

When  we  recall  the  strange  fate  of  Herbart  in  his  uvv'^i 
fatherland,  it  is  clear  why  this  triple  or  quadruple  name  has 
been  accepted  as  the  most  nearly  adequate  title  of  the  peda- 
gogical doctrine  which  has  become  so  influential  in  America. 
His  book  on  General  Pedagogy,  the  source  for  all  subsequent 
developments,  appeared  in  1806,  but  received  practically  no 
attention  from  the  thinking  pubHc.  The  thinkers  were  so 
engrossed  in  the  philosophy  of  Fichte,  Schelling,  and  es- 
pecially Hegel,  as  to  have  no  ears  for  the  message  of  another. 
Herbart  lamented,  **My  poor  pedagogy  has  not  been  able  to 
lift  up  its  voice"     (11  :  4). 

Herbart  remained  a  closed  book  until  he  received  the 
fructifying  interpretation  of  his  disciples.  Ziller  was  recog- 
nized as  especially  happy  both  in  extending  and  explaining 
Herbart.  In  respect  to  the  doctrine  of  method,  for  instance, 
the  late  Professor  Vogt,  of  Vienna,  has  expressed  the  opinion 
that  it  seemed  for  several  years  to  be  a  labyrinth  of  concepts 
out  of  which  it  was  hard  to  make  anything  of  practical  mo- 
ment until  Ziller  gave  a  clear  explanation  of  the  meaning  and 
showed  how  application  might  be  made.  The  interpretations 
upon  the  Herbartian  text  varied  with  other  thinkers,  who,  as 
well  as  Ziller,  won  enthusiastic  followers  for  their  views. 

The  Americans  who  were  first  instrumental  in  introduc- 
ing Herbartianism  recognized  that  in  Germany  it  was  a  col- 
lective term  which  included  exponents  of  quite  varied  opinions. 
It  is  evident  that,  studying  as  they  did  in  Germany,  they 
would  get  their  Herbartianism  in  some  one  of  the  systematic 
interpretations  prevailing  at  that  time.  As  a  matter  of  fact, 
it  came  about  that  it  was  the  Herbart-Ziller-Stoy  pedagogy 
which  was  propogated  in  America  by  returning  enthusiasts. 

We  must  picture  Herbartianism  in  the  educational  life  of 
America  as  a  force  both  as  it  transforms  educational  thought 
and  practice  and  as  it  is  itself  transformed  by  the  environ- 
ment in  which  it  works.  It  does  not  find  unquestioned  ac- 
ceptance without  a  change.  What  we  call  Herbartianism, 
after  it  has  been  developing  here  for  twenty  years,  is  the  re- 
sultant of  two  forces — ^the  initial  force  as  it  comes  from  its  in- 


6         THE   DOCTRINES   OF   HERBART   IN   THE    UNITED    STATES 

terpreters  in  Germany  plus  the  American  way  of  looking  at 
life  and  education. 

Perhaps  the  movement  can  be  divided  into  periods,  if  too 
much  emphasis  is  not  put  upon  such  divisions.  Before  1880 
there  were  only  stray  notices  of  Herbart  in  America.  From 
1880  to  1890  Herbartians  were  preparing  for  their  work,  es- 
pecially by  study  in  Europe.  1890-1900  is  the  period  of 
propagation.  Beginning  about  1895  is  a  period  of  criticism 
and  the  formulation  of  American  Herbartianism. 

There  are  some  facts  of  a  general  nature  which  may  be 
stated  here  because  they  give  a  direction  to  our  thought  at  the 
outset.  Herbartianism  was  introduced  into  America  oppor- 
tunely, not  bom  as  out  of  due  time.  Various  events  prepared 
for  its  coming.  American  thought  was  bringing  forth  new 
scientific  and  philosophical  ideas  which  tended  to  clarify,  illus- 
trate, and  confirm,  or  else  to  modify  somewhat,  the  traditional 
Herbartian  theories  so  that  they  underwent  development  and 
transformation  into  a  sort  of  American  Herbartianism.  The 
various  doctrines  were  discussed  one  after  another  and  this 
fact  partially  accounts  for  the  order  of  the  following  chapters. 


THE   DOCTRINES   OF   HERBART   IN   THE   UNITED   STATES         7 

CHAPTER  I. 
A  Sketch  of  Pre-herbartian  Pedagogy 

In  view  of  the  main  purpose  of  thi's  thesis,  there  are  a  few 
points  to  guide  in  the  selection  of  subject  matter  for  this  chap- 
ter, which  may  be  stated  in  the  form  of  questions.  What  was 
the  prevailing  pedagogy  which  Herbartianism  was  to  sup- 
plant? What  were  the  most  important  topics  discussed  by 
educators  from  1870  to  1890  to  which  Herbartians  might 
make  new  and  definite  contributions?  What  solutions  were 
proposed  before  the  advent  of  Herbartianism?  On  what 
grounds  were  the  answers  made?  To  what  extent  were  the 
answers  and  reasons  in  line  with  Herbartianism  and  hence 
preparatory  to  it?  To  what  extent  were  they  in  an  opposite 
direction?  To  use  an  Herbartian  term,  we  are  inquiring  into 
the  pedagogical  '.'apperception  mass"  of  American  educators. 

The  Reports  of  the  National  Educational  Association 
give  the  best  idea  of  the  prevailing  pedagogy,  as  they  also  con- 
stitute later  on  a  good  index  of  the  progress  of  Herbartianism. 
The  meetings  of  this  association  were  and  are  a  sort  of  congress 
of  educators,  serving  as  a  clearing  house  for  educational  ideas. 
Its  reports  are  a  fair  index  of  educational  movements.  For 
greater  detail  we  may  have  recourse  to  educational  periodicals 
and  pedagogical  works. 

The  point  of  departure  for  all  pedagogical  discussions  was 
practical  questions.  Their  solution  was  sought  generally  on 
the  basis  of  currently  accepted  pedagogical  principles. 

Altho  the  independent  position  of  the  American  schools, 
with  regard  to  the  church,  made  them  targets  for  criticism, 
there  was  no  question  more  frequently  discussed  than  moral 
education.  It  was  pressed  upon  educators.  There  was 
scarcely  a  session  of  the  N.  E.  A.  at  which  there  were  not  one  or 
more  addresses  on  this  topic.  There  was  continual  reiteration 
of  its  supreme  importance.  "The  central  aim  is  effective 
moral  training."  Speakers  pointed  out  that  intellectual  train- 
ing may  do  more  harm  than  good,  as  in  the  case  of  counterfeit- 
ing, where  it  may  make  a  difficult  crime  easier. 

There  is  little  evidence  of  even  an  inkling  of  any  necessity 
for  direct  instruction  in  morality.  They  apparently  think 
that  parables  and  anecdotes  teaching  moral  lessons,  history 
and  literature  affording  good  examples,  and  maxims  giving 
rules  of  conduct,  exhaust  the  possible  relations  between  in- 
struction and  morality.  One  man  wrote  that  "act-impelling 
desires  are  awakened  by  knowledge,"  but  from  the  context  he 
evidently  had  in  mind  nothing  more  than  teaching  "^he  bare 
maxims  of  duty.  In  connection  with  right  methods  of  learn- 
ing, there  are  certain  virtues  such  as  honesty  and  persever- 


8         THE   DOCTRINES   OF   HERBART   IN   THE    UNITED   STATES 

ance,  that  are  supposed  to  result  as  by-products.  This  sug- 
gests that  practically  all  dependence  is  put  on  training,  guid- 
ance, and  the  example  of  teacher  and  community  (105), 
In  fact,  educational  thinkers,  thru  presuppositions  on  the 
nature  of  the  will  and  the  inherited  notion  of  the  unworthi- 
ness  of  the  feeling  life.were  kept  from  seeing  how  the  subjects 
of  instruction  could  contribute  to  moral  training.  The  will 
was  a  sort  of  unapproachable  entity,  or  at  best  an  independent 
faculty.  The  abstraction,  duty,  was  glorified  sometimes  as  if 
for  the  very  purpose  of  slurring  the  feelings.  From  this  point 
of  view  it  was  difficult  to  perceive  a  relation  between  instruc- 
tion and  will  thru  the  feeHngs.  On  the  contrary,  the  feeUngs 
were  looked  upon  as  seducers  of  the  will.  The  very  disciplin- 
ing of  the  will  had  for  its  aim  the  repression  of  desires.  Ex- 
tremists even  went  so  far  as  to  cite  brute  animals  as  ex- 
amples of  beings  controlled  by  the  feelings. 

Many  a  teacher  must  have  been  haunted  by  the  fact  that 
there  was  no  established  connection  between  the  chief  work  of 
the  school  room  and  the  accepted  first  aim  of  education. 
The  Herbartians  held  that  the  key  to  the  situation  lay  in  the 
doctrine  of  interest. 

In  one  sense  American  pedagogy  was  preparing  the  way 
for  a  phase  of  Herbartianism  by  keeping  up  an  interest  in  the 
moral  aim  and  by  a  half  consciousness  of  the  need  of  a  bridge 
between  instruction  and  morality.  In  another  sense,  how- 
ever, our  pedagogy  was  putting  difficulties  in  the  way  of  Her- 
bartianism in  the  form  of  a  solution  of  the  problem  of  moral 
education  which  considered  the  will  a  faculty,  applied  the  cur- 
rent theory  of  formal  discipline,  and  ignored  the  feeling  life. 

This  fact  leads  to  an  inquiry  as  to  the  notions  held  by 
these  earlier  thinkers  concerning  interest.  Some  writers  on 
moral  training  gave  expression  to  statements  that  showed  a 
sort  of  appreciation  of  the  doctrine  of  interest.  One,  for  ex- 
ample, said  that  the  greatest  educational  need  was  that  pupils 
go  out  "loving  truth,  honor,  and  justice,  and  their  neighbors 
and  their  God . ' '  Alt  ho  in  the  address  from  which  this  extract  is 
taken  it  has  little  function  other  than  that  of  an  eloquent  sen- 
tence, the  use  of  the  word  "loving"  is  an  example  of  a  wide- 
spread pre-Herbartian  notion  of  the  condition  in  which  a 
child's  heart  should  be.  In  this  sense  love  can  easily  form,  as 
it  once  formed  for  Herbart  himself,  a  transition  to  the  doctrine  of 
interest.  Some  one  else  spoke  of  "kindling  a  genuine  interest  in 
the  things  of  the  understanding,"  (105)  but  the  term  interest 
was  used  without  involving  any  systematic  relation  to  morality 
or  the  subjects  of  instruction.  Its  use  was  little  more  than  a 
prophetic  glimpse  of  a  truth  to  be  later  revealed.  A  com- 
mittee on  the  educational  value  of  common  school  studies,  in 
their  report  in  1886,  also  used  the  word  interest.     It  speaks 


THE   DOCTRINES   OF   HERBART  IN  THE   UNITED   STATES         9 

of  "the  interests  or  objects  of  life,"  "the  relative  value  of  the 
interests,  and  the  relative  value  of  studies  in  securing  these 
interests,"  (67  :  419)  but  the  word  "interests"  is  used  in  such  a 
way  as  to  show  complete  innocence  of  the  significance  later 
attached  to  it.  The  much  used  text  book  of  Page  has  a  chap- 
ter on  exciting  interest  in  studies.  But  the  sections  of  the 
chapter — emulation,  prizes,  proper  incentives — show  the 
special  sense  in  which  the  term  is  used. 

The  function  of  pleasure  and  pain  in  learning  had  cer- 
tainly been  discussed  in  English  pedagogy  since  the  days  of 
Ascham,  who  treated  the  question  at  considerable  length  and 
concluded:  "Bring  not  up  your  children  in  learning  by  com- 
pulsion and  fear,  but  by  playing  and  pleasure"  (Scholemaster 
96).  Another  had  expressed  the  more  common  view  that 
"the  Rodde  onelie  was  the  sworde,  that  must  keep  the  Scole  in 
obedience  and  the  Scholar  in  good  order"  (Scholemaster  47) . 
This  conception  of  pleasure  in  learning  was  associated  with  the 
notion  of  making  study  interesting.  It  grew  into  a  sort  of 
counter  theory  to  the  doctrine  of  effort  which  was  the  off- 
spring of  the  doctrine  of  discipline,  because,  as  it  was  argued, 
the  best  resulted  where  the  most  effort  was  put  forth.  More 
effort  had  to  be  expended  on  the  unpleasant,  therefore  the  in- 
teresting and  pleasant  should  be  ruled  out.  The  party  who 
favored  making  learning  interesting  received  support  from  the 
humane  movements  of  the  century  and  from  the  Froebel 
Kindergarten  movement.  Those  who  championed  interest, 
however,  were  no  match  for  their  opponents  in  argument. 
As  the  accepted  basis  of  pedagogy,  namely,  the  doctrine  of 
discipline,  favored  the  opposite  viewpoint,  they  had  to  rely 
very  largely  upon  sentimental  grounds.  .The  greatest  im- 
petus to  this  conception  of  interest  came  from  Herbert  Spencer 
whose  writings  gave  a  dignity  to  the  subject. 

The  glimpse  we  have  taken  is  sufficient  to  show  the  con- 
fusion in  the  use  of  the  term  "interest"  in  popular  speech. 
It  helps  us  to  appreciate  the  difficulty  of  grasping  the  Her- 
bartian  doctrine  and  also  suggests  who  among  former  edu- 
cational thinkers  will  be  the  foes  of  Herbartianism  and  who 
will  be  friendly — tho  friendly  because  they  interpret  the  Her- 
Ipartian  "interest"  to  mean  what  they  have  understood  by  the 
word.  This  adds  still  more  to  the  confusion.  The  pre-Her- 
bartian  thought  had  in  one  sense  prepared  the  way  by  fre- 
quent discussion  of  interest.  In  another  sense  difficulties  had 
been  put  in  the  way  of  getting  a  correct  conception  of  the 
Herbartian  use  of  the  term. 

Another  question  often  discussed  was  the  relative  value 
of  studies,  the  controversy  over  the  sciences  and  classics  having 
much  to  do  with  bringing  this  topic  into  the  foreground.  The 
earlier  method  of  determining  educational  values,  gives  an  ex- 


lO       THE    DOCTRINES    OF   HERBART   IN   THE    UNITED   STATES 

cellent  example  of  the  older  pedagogy  in  contrast  with  Her- 
bartian  thought. 

A  committee  of  the  National  Educational  Association, 
of  which  W.  T.  Harris  was  chairman,  reported  in  1876  on  a 
course  of  study.  They  were  guided  in  their  selection  of  studies 
by  two  principles — discipHne  and  usefulness.  Reading,  writ- 
ing, and  arithmetic  had  a  paramount  value  over  all  other 
branches  (47  :  60) .  The  committee  found  the  material  of  in- 
struction to  lie  in  two  fields — man  and  nature.  A  course  of 
study  was  outlined  into  five  parallel  groups:  nature,  both 
organic  and  inorganic;  man,  intellect,  feeling  and  will.  Arith- 
metic, geography,  grammar,  history,  and  literature  are  typical 
studies  in  the  five  groups.  If  we  substitute  interest  for  the 
subjects,  we  see  a  striking  resemblance  to  Herbart.  But  just 
that  word — the  key  to  the  situation,  was  lacking.  The  fact  is, 
there  was  no  further  progress  in  solving  the  problem  for 
fifteen  years.  If  anything,  there  was  retrogression.  The 
more  the  thinkers  of  the  old  school  worked  upon  the  question 
the  more  they  enmeshed  themselves  in  a  tangled  web.  The 
need  of  a  knowledge  of  the  educational  value  of  the  different 
studies  was  strongly  felt  (48  :  48). 

The  report  of  a  committee  in  1886  on  the  educational 
value  of  each  of  the  common  school  studies  may  be  taken  as 
typical  of  the  results  of  the  effort  to  solve  the  problem  on  pre- 
vailing educational  principles.  There  was  a  substantial  agree- 
ment among  the  members  of  the  committee,  and,  in  turn,  they 
reflected  the  general  view  of  their  contemporaries  concerning 
the  standards  for  judging  the  relative  educational  value  of 
common  school  studies.  In  general,  two  values  were  recog- 
nized— practical  and  disciplinary.  Dr.  White  added  a  third 
which  he  called  culture  and  which  referred  to  the  mental  satis- 
faction or  delight  studies  afford.  Dr.  Brooks  stated  the  tests 
a  little  differently,  in  that  he  said  the  value  lay  in  culture  and 
knowledge,  but  he  meant  by  "culture"  the  same  that  others 
meant  by  "discipline."  Since  knowledge  is  either  purely 
practical  or  a  means  to  mental  development,  which  is  dis- 
cipline. Dr.  Brooks'  statement  resolves  itself  into  the  first. 
Discipline  was  considered  the  more  important  of  the  two 
values. 

To  ascertain  the  worth  of  a  study,  declared  the  report, 
the  educator  must  determine  both  the  relative  worth  of  the 
faculties  and  the  value  of  a  given  study  in  cultivating  them. 
It  will  not  be  necessary  to  go  fully  into  the  rather  elaborate 
classification  of  the  mental  capacities  arranged  in  a  scale  of 
worth  (67  :  410).  Let  the  following  suffice  as  showing  the 
method  of  ranking  the  faculties:  moral  character  ranks  first 
with  a  percentage  of  100,  deductive  thought  grades  95,  in- 
ductive thought  90,  memory  50,  attention  95,  perception  70. 


THE   DOCTRINES   OP   HERBART   IN   THE   UNITED   STATES       II 

The  different  studies  are  classified  with  the  number  of  facul- 
ties they  train  and  the  degree  of  training,  with  markings  on 
the  basis  of  10.  A  part  of  one  example  will  illustrate  this 
curious  system.  The  worth  of  arithmetic  for  training  the 
different  faculties  is  indicated  by  the  figure  following  each: 
the  language  faculty  5,  perception  4,  memory  6,  generalization 
7,  judgment  9,  inductive  reasoning  5,  deductive  reasoning  9, 
attention  10,  will  10.  A  third  table  is  made  combining  the 
worth  of  the  faculties  influenced  with  the  values  of  the  par- 
ticular studies  for  the  faculties.  The  grand  total  will  show 
the  true  worth  of  a  study  for  discipline.  Now  the  studies  may 
be  arranged  in  a  scale  relative  to  their  value.  They  range  in 
value  from  writing,  worth  1960  units,  to  Latin  which  is  worth 
6230  units. 

A  somewhat  similar  method,  not  unlike  Herbert  Spencer's, 
is  followed  in  ranking  studies  as  to  their  utility.  Of  what  use 
are  studies  for  life,  business,  enjoyment,  parenthood,  society, 
politics,  morality?  The  method  of  ranking  studies  would 
be  similar  to  the  preceding.  Dr.  Brooks  does  not  carry  thru 
the  investigation.  He  says,  "I  venture  the  opinion  that  the 
solution  of  the  problem  from  the  standpoint  of  culture  (dis- 
cipline) is  sufficient  for  all  practical  purposes  in  education." 
"If  discipline  is  attained,  useful  knowledge  is  usually  ac- 
quired" (67  :  419).  The  point  considered  of  minor  worth 
bridges  over  into  Herbartianism.  It  is  to  be  noted  that  the 
chairman  of  this  committee,  and  likewise  Herbert  Spencer, 
were  thinking  of  the  amount  of  knowledge  that  might  be  put 
to  use  and  not  of  the  interests  which  might  be  created. 

Herbert  Spencer's  celebrated  essay  on  "What  knowledge 
is  most  worth"  aroused  a  great  deal  of  debate  about  educa- 
tional values.  No  new  principles  were  advanced  for  their 
solution.  The  principles  were  discipline  and  usefulness. 
Spencer's  conclusion  is  the  opposite  of  that  of  Dr.  Brooks'  just 
quoted.  Spencer  says.  Choose  the  useful  and  discipline  will 
take  care  of  itself. 

With  all  this  discussion,  the  curriculum  threatened  and 
still  threatens,  for  the  lack  of  an  adequate  selective  principle, 
to  be  an  unwieldy  conglomerate  mass  of  studies.  One  class 
demands  that  agriculture  be  taught  because  the  farmer  wants 
it,  another  class  wants  political  economy,  a  third  preparation 
for  trade  and  industry,  physicians  want  more  physiology, 
lawyers  want  law — a  governor  in  a  western  state  recommends 
in  his  annual  message  that  the  penal  code  be  used  as  a  text 
book — prohibitionists  want  temperance  instruction,  and  so  on 
indefinitely  (N.  E.  A.  1883  :  14). 

Closely  related  to  the  selection  of  studies  was  their  se- 
quence. The  topic  was  an  old  one  in  American  thought. 
Doubtless  the  Pestalozzian  wave  added  to  the  interest  in  the 


12       THE   DOCTRINES    OF   HERBART   IN   THE    UNITED   STATES 

question.  Herbart  had  credited  Pestalozzi  with  an  earnest 
effort  to  find  the  best  order  for  the  studies.  Already  in  the 
forties  President  Hill  of  Harvard  wrote,  with  profundity  of 
thought,  on  the  "True  Order  of  Studies,"  but  in  the  period 
we  have  particularly  in  mind  there  was  no  carefully  worked  out 
and  systematic  treatment  based  on  principles.  The  chief 
reliance  was  in  the  logical  maxim  from  the  simple  to  the  com- 
plex. However,  there  were  suggestions  of  principles  that  in- 
terest us  because  they  prepare  pedagogical  thought  for  the 
Herbartian  principles  shortly  to  be  presented. 

We  may  take  for  illustration  the  report  of  1876  by  Harris 
and  others.  One  suggestion  for  securing  an  order  of  studies  is 
that  each  of  the  five  groups  must  be  represented  in  the  course 
each  year.  There  is  a  hint  of  that  important  principle  of  se- 
quence:  namely,  apperception.  True,  it  is  not  called  "apper- 
ception," but  is  spoken  of  as  previous  preparation.  Tho  not 
systematically  applied,  it  is  worth  something  to  have  even  a 
hint  of  this  principle. 

There  is  another  suggestion  in  this  report  which  may  have 
prepared  the  mind  for  the  Herbartian  doctrine  of  culture 
epochs.  It  is  the  argument  that  it  is  the  prevailing  scientific 
conception  of  the  age  that  in  order  to  know  a  subject  thoroly 
it  must  be  studied  in  its  history,  i.  e.,  in  its  embryology  and 
growth  (47  :  63) .  Use  was  not  made  of  this  argument  in  de- 
termining the  order  of  studies,  but  it  was  urged  in  favor  of 
retaining  Latin  and  Greek.  Since  they  represented  the  first 
stages  in  the  development  of  the  race,  in  order  to  know  the 
present  we  must  know  the  first  steps  in  the  development. 

Herbert  Spencer,  more  than  any  other  one  person,  made 
American  educators  familiar  with  the  notion  of  parallelism  of 
racial  and  human  development.  His  treatment  called  forth 
much  thought  and  discussion.  Spencer  prepared  the  way  for 
the  Herbartian  idea,  altho  he  applied  the  notion  quite  differ- 
ently, being  primarily  concerned  with  the  sciences;  hence 
his  application  to  method  rather  than  to  the  sequence  of  stud- 
ies. Herbert  Spencer  is  to  be  credited  with  advancing  in- 
terest as  a  selective  principle  for  material  and  sequence. 
"No  subject  is  worth  teaching  which  is  not  interesting," 
would  be  a  short  way  of  expressing  this  principle. 

In  practice  the  child's  capacities  had  to  be  taken  into  con- 
sideration. Systematic  child  study  had  merely  been  begun. 
In  the  United  States  it  dates  from  Hall's  study  of  the  "Con- 
tents of  Children's  Minds"  based  upon  a  similar  Berlin  study. 
But  Stoy  had  made  such  studies  in  Jena  years  before,  because 
any  application  of  Herbartian  principles  depended  upon  such 
knowledge.  Child  study  has  more  significance  for  Her- 
bartianism  than  is  often  credited.     Its  dependence  upon  the 


THE    DOCTRINES    OF   HERBART   IN   THE    UNITED    STATES       13 

intimate  and  systematic  appreciation  of  child  life  is  easily- 
overlooked  by  non-Herbartian  students  of  children. 

The  principle  which  had  the  most  influence  in  determin- 
ing the  order  of  studies  was  a  logical  one.  A  certain  subject 
has  to  be  mastered  before  another  is  studied.  In  spirit,  the 
principle  is  anti-Herbartian,  for  it  opposes  the  doctrine  of 
apperception.  The  latter  says  certain  material  may  be 
studied  now  because  the  pupil  is  prepared  for  it.  The  view  we 
are  considering  says  that  such  and  such  material  must  be 
studied  because  of  what  is  to  be  studied  next.  There  are  sug- 
gestions of  the  Herbartian  principles  latent  in  American  edu- 
cational thought.  They  need  to  be  classified  and  systematic- 
ally applied. 

We  have  had  to  refer  to  the  theoretical  principles  upon 
which  attempted  solutions  were  made.  So  far  as  theory  or 
science  of  education  are  concerned,  America  was  practically 
under  the  dominance  of  English  writers,  notably  Joseph  Payne. 
W.  H.  Payne  said  in  1880  that  Joseph  Payne  had  infifuenced 
pedagogy  more  than  any  other  writer  (N.  E.  A.  1880  :  45), 
Bain's  "Science  of  Education"  was  accepted  as  a  guide  in 
England,  and  in  a  far  less  measure  in  America,  in  determining 
what  a  science  of  education  should  be  (40  :  236) .  It  was  by  no 
means  so  popular  or  influential  as  Joseph  Payne's  writings. 

The  central  thought  of  what  may  be  called  English  peda- 
gogy is  the  idea  of  discipline  and  that  based  on  a  faculty 
psychology.  All  this  goes  back  to  John  Locke.  The  most 
popular  American  text  book  of  pedagogy  expressed  the 
thought  in  one  sentence:  "Discipline  of  the  mind,  then,  is  the 
great  thing  in  intellectual  training"  (92  :  97).  Payne  wrote, 
"Faculty  of  whatever  kind  grows  by  exercise"  (94  :  170). 
English  teachers  had  actually  worked  out  in  detail  the  dis- 
ciplinary value,  not  only  of  the  different  subjects,  but  of  the 
different  classic  authors  down  to  definite  pages  and  portions  in 
minute  detail.  So  in  the  spirit  of  such  a  pedagogy  the  live 
question  of  educational  values  was  fought  out.  The  promot- 
ers of  new  subjects,  the  sciences  and  modem  languages,  were 
first  concerned  to  show  the  disciplinary  value  of  the  new 
studies.  It  is  to  be  expected  that  a  generation  brought  up  on 
such  theories  would  fight  Herbartianism.  We  will  have  oc- 
casions to  note  some  of  the  objections  to  the  new  pedagogy 
based  on  necessary  corollaries  of  the  prevailing  pedagogy. 

It  was  often  asserted  that  Pastalozzianism  was  the  ruling 
pedagogy  before  the  introduction  of  Herbart.  This  view  was 
shared  by  Harris  and  many  prominent  educators.  The 
Pestalozzi  as  interpreted  by  Harris  was  the  Pestalozzi  as  prac- 
ticed in  the  schools,  i.e.,  the  use  of  object  lessons  for  training 
the  senses  and  object  lessons  to  provide  material  before  ab- 
straction   takes    place.     The    defect    pointed    out    was    that 


14       THE    DOCTRINES    OF   HERBART   IN   THE    UNITED   STATES 

Pestalozzi  took  no  account  of  previous  experience  as  an  aid 
to  perception.  We  are  not  concerned  with  the  correctness  of 
the  interpretation  put  upon  him.  We  want  to  point  out  the 
interpretation  because  later  it  plays  a  considerable  part  in  the 
initial  stages  of  the  Herbartian  movement. 

The  kindergarten  had  been  established,  and  the  theories 
of  Froebel  had  won  exponents.  This  is  worth  noting  in  this 
place,  for  the  American  mind  was  predisposed  by  these  the- 
ories to  accept  Herbart  with  certain  modifications  which  would 
harmonize  features  of  Herbart  and  Froebel. 

Mentioning  Pestalozzi  and  Froebel  suggests  a  consider- 
ation of  the  general  attitude  toward  German  educational 
thought,  before  drawing  the  conclusion  of  this  chapter. 
There  had  been  fifty  years  and  more  of  intimate  pedagogical 
relation  with  Germany.  A  conscious  influence  in  an  unbroken 
succession  begins  with  the  publication  of  books  on  Prussian 
education,  visits  and  reports  of  educators,  the  presence  of  im- 
migrants, especially  scholars  exiled  for  political  reasons  in  the 
thirties  and  in  forty-eight,  and  in  the  returning  American 
students  singing  the  praises  of  German  Universities. 

Mr.  Ticknor  was  charmed  by  an  account  of  German  Uni- 
versities contained  in  Madame  de  Stael's  book  on  Germany 
(62).  Soon  after  he  matriculated  at  Goettingen  Uiiiversity. 
He  was  followed  by  such  representative  Americans  as  Everett, 
Bancroft,  and  Longfellow.  By  1850  there  had  been  not  less 
than  225  Americans  at  German  Universities.  The  translation 
of  the  report  of  Victor  Cousin  on  the  Prussian  system  fell  into 
American  hands.  The  state  of  Michigan  organized  her  school 
system  on  this  model.  Of  the  many  notable  educators  to  re- 
port on  German  education  from  their  own  observation  was 
Horace  Mann.  The  famous  seventh  annual  report  was  the 
more  influential  because  of  the  opposition  of  the  school-mast- 
ers which  it  aroused. 

Almost  invariably  we  have  heard  the  bright  side  of  Ger- 
man education.  Seldom  have  the  dark  colors  been  painted. 
German  ideals  have  influenced  more  than  German  realities. 
The  criticisms  in  English  have  been  generally  of  a  mild  na- 
ture, such  as  Carlyle's  characterization  of  German  professors 
as  "miserable  creatures  lost  in  statistics,"  or  Lowell's  humor- 
ous complaint  that  "German  scientists  have  picked  all  the 
apples  of  wonder.  Perhaps  there  are  two  or  three  left  in 
Africa.  Two  or  three  have  hitherto  hung  luckily  beyond  reach 
on  a  lofty  bough  shadowing  the  interior  of  that  continent — but 
there  is  a  German  doctor  at  this  very  moment  pelting  at  them 
with  sticks  and  stones."  Severe  criticism  has  been  wasted, 
in  the  face  of  the  popularity  of  German  ideas. 

Under  German  influences  and  after  German  models,  we 
had    evolved    an    organized    school    system, — borrowed    the 


THE   DOCTRINES    OF   HERBART   IN   THE   UNITED   STATES       1 5 

kindergarten  in  toto,  revised  and  revolutionized  the  elementary 
schools,  and  added  the  philosophical  faculty  to  the  universi- 
ties. As  if  to  confirm  us  in  our  faith,  there  came,  in  quick  suc- 
cession, the  unparalleled  victories  of  Prussia  over  Denmark, 
Austria,  and  France.  Von  Moltke's  statement,  "The  school- 
master has  won  our  battles,"  was  quoted  time  out  of  mind. 
Respect  for  German  educational  thought  increased,  if  that 
were  possible.  It  is  obvious  that  the  general  interest  in  Get- 
man  education  explains  partly  the  response  to  German  Her-^ 
bartianism. 

ti-^-  To'  stimmarize :  we  have  seen  that  Americans  during  the 
seventies  and  eighties  were  laboring  with  the  following  ques- 
iriOns :  multiplicity  of  subjects,  choice  and  value  of  studies,  and 
sequence  of  studies.  They  were  troubled  about  realizing  the 
educational  aim.  We  have  noted  the  methods  of  solution 
attempted,  some  of  which  Herbartians  would  have  to  discard 
and  some  of  which  would  be  favorable  to  the  new  views.  We 
have  noted  the  confusion  in  American  pedagogy,  and  we  must 
have  felt  the  lack  of  clarifying  principles.  Just  as  into  a  test 
tube  of  cloudy  liquid  the  chemist  may  pour  a  clarifying  solu- 
tion, so  the  introduction  of  Herbartianism  clarified  American 
pedagogy.  Herbartians  isolated  the  problems  and  gave  a 
systematic  outline  under  which  the  discussions  might  be  car-  ^ 
ried  on.  To  the  problems  with  which  American  educators  '_ 
were  concerned  Herbart  offered  a  solution  in  a  systematic, 
form,  under  such  heads  as,  the  aim,  apperception,  interest,  con- 
c^tration,  culture  epochs,  and  formal  steps. 


1 6      THE   DOCTRINES   OF   HERBART  IN  THE   UNITED   STATES 

CHAPTER  II. 

THE    HERBARTIAN    MOVEMENT    IN    AMERICA 

There  was  but  little  known  of  Herbart  previous  to  about 
1890.  In  1876  a  sketch  of  Herbart's  pedagogies,  by  Dr.  Karl 
Schmidt,  appeared  in  the  Journal  of  Speculative  Philosophy. 
That  an  account  of  Herbart  should  be  first  read  in  a  magazine 
devoted  to  speculative  philosophy,  and  chiefly  Hegelian  at 
that,  is  suggestive  of  the  fate  of  Herbart.  As  at  home,  so  in 
America,  the  glamor  of  Hegel  eclipsed  Herbart,  so  far  as  im- 
mediate recognition  was  concerned.  It  is  the  beginning  of  a 
curious  parallelism  between  Herbart  in  Germany  and  Herbart 
in  America.  In  1878  Barnard  published  in  "German  Peda- 
gogy" a  few  pages  on  Herbart  which  had  previously  appeared 
in  the  American  Journal. 

Col.  Parker  said  in  1880,  before  the  National  Educational 
Association,  that  people  had  been  accusing  him  of  stealing  his 
ideas.  He  said  jestlingly  it  was  true — he  had  stolen  from 
Aristotle,  Pestalozzi,  and  Spencer  (N.  E.  A.  1880  :  471).  He 
does  not  mention  Herbart  as  having  also  contributed.  In  1882 
G.  Stanley  Hall  read  a  paper  before  the  Department  of  Super- 
intendence on  "Chairs  of  Pedagogy  in  our  Higher  Institutions 
of  Learning."  He  made  repeated  and  extended  reference  to 
German  pedagogy  and  asserted  with  emphasis  that  pedagogy 
"was  far  more  cultivated  and  further  developed  in  Germany 
than  in  this  country  (46  :  42)".  Hall  made  a  very  compli- 
mentary reference  to  an  Herbartian — not  mentioned  by  name 
— whom  he  looked  upon  as  the  most  active  of  the  professors  of 
pedagogy,  and  reported  that  this  professor  was  constantly 
lecturing,  writing,  and  studying  children  and  methods  (46  :  36) . 
In  1883  Professor  DeGarmo,  in  a  paper  before  the  N.  E.  A., 
had  occasion  to  refer  to  German  pedagogy,  but  made  no  refer- 
ence to  Herbart.  He  did  make  this  significant  statement, 
tho:  "I  am  now  on  my  way  to  Germany  there  to  spend  some, 
years  in  the  study  of  pedagogy"  (N.  E.  A.  1883  :  50).  As  a 
motive,  he  said  he  hoped  to  return  and  help  to  lift  American 
Normal  schools  to  a  higher  efficiency. 

In  1884  a  committee,  of  which  Harris,  Hall,  Soldan.and 
others  were  members,  presented  a  report  affirming  that  there 
was  a  science  of  education.  Mr.  Soldan  in  referring  to  Herbart 
as  the  founder  of  a  science  of  pedagogy  extensively  taught  in 
Germany,  praises  him  for  his  systematization  of  pedagogical 
knowledge  (48  :  64,  44,  46) .  The  vagueness  of  his  conception 
of  Herbart  is  apparent  in  Mr.  Soldan's  statement  that  Her- 
bart's aim  of  education  was  freedom.  A  report  before  the 
N.  E.  A.  in  1888,  on  "Books  of  Pedagogy,"  together  with  its 
discussion,  indicates  how  slight  an  impression  Herbart  had 


THE    DOCTRINES    OF   HERBART   IN   THE    UNITED   STATES       1 7 


made,  for  in  this  report  he  is  mentioned  no  more  than  if  he  had 
never  existed.  Pestalozzi,  Rousseau,  Froebel,  Sailer,  Fitch, 
Macell,  Latham,  are  some  of  the  names  used. 

There  was  then  studying  in  Jena,  under  Professor  Rein, 
a  band  of  young  Americans,  who  on  their  return  to  America 
were  to  change  completely  the  current  of  educational  dis- 
cussion. No  less  than  nine  had  studied  in  Jena  before  1890. 
Among  the  first  were  DeGarmo,  C.  A.  and  Frank  McMurry, 
Lukens,  Rice,  Van  Liew.  Before  1900  the  number  must  have 
approached  fifty. 

The  Jena  Seminar  is,  then,  practically  the  fountain  head 
of  American  Herbartianism.  It  has  a  distinctive  vitality  that 
wins  disciples  for  Herbart.  Americans  were  greatly  interested 
in  its  organizatiou  and  purpose,  and  freely  discussed  it.  The 
first  work  that  counted  toward  the  propagation  of  Herbartian- 
ism in  America  was  the  quiet  work  of  pioneers  in  encouraging 
others  to  go  to  Jena. 

If  middle  Germany,  and  especially  Jena,  was  the  center 
from  which  Americans  brought  their  Herbartian  ideas,  with  as 
much  truth,  Illinois,  and  esepcially  the  Normal  School  at 
Normal  in  that  state,  was  the  center  for  their  distribution  in 
America  in  the  early  days.  DeGarmo  taught  here  after  he 
returned  from  study  in  Germany,  as  did  the  McMurrys.  The 
first  practice  school  on  Herbartian  principles  was  organized  at 
Normal  (112  :  98).  The  School-Masters'  Club  of  Illinois  dis- 
cussed Herbartian  questions.  The  first  Herbartian  literature 
of  any  extent  came  from  that  state. 

Continuing  to  look  upon  the  N.  E.  A.  as  mirroring  the 
progress  of  Herbart,  we  note  first  how  gradually  Herbart  comes 
into  prominence.  In  1887  DeGarmo  presented  a  paper  on 
German  Normal  Schools.     Herbart's  name  was  not  mentioned. 

Note :  The  following  is  a  partial  list  of  American  students 
in  Jena  in  the  earlier  period : 


Atkinson 

Abbot 

Almnio 

Bloome 

Blaich,  Lydia 

Bishop 

^  Brown,  E.  E. 

Boggs 

Brochhouse 

Dodson 

Cowin 

DeGarmo 

Earhart 

Eckoff 

Ggalliner 

Gordon 

Gentile 

Goodknight 

Jennings 

Griffin 

Hall,  J.  B. 

Klemm 

Karr 

Kleinsorge 

Lukens 

Mace 

McCrecy 

McMurry,  C.  A. 

McMurry,  F.  L. 

Moore 

Noss 

Rice 

Rishel 

Rowe 

Russell 

Sawyer 

Seeley 

Shaw 

Shank,  Burgess 

Shank,  Bemice 

Techheimer 

-.-Van  Liew 

Whitney 

Wilkinson 

l8       THE    DOCTRINES    OF   HERBART   IN   THE    UNITED   STATES 

The  same  year  Mr.  Soldan  contributed  a  paper  entitled, 
"Outline  of  a  Philosophy  of  Education."  On  reading  over 
Mr.  Soldan's  paper,  one  sees  in  every  line  the  Herbartian 
source  of  the  ideas.  He  treated  in  a  purely  Herbartian  way 
the  six  forms  of  interest,  the  ethical  aim,  and  sciences,  effect  of 
interest  on  the  will,  guidance,  discipline,  and  instruction;  but 
Herbart's  name  was  not  mentioned.  No  one  discussed  the 
paper. 

A  necessary  element  in  any  successful  propaganda  of 
ideas  is  to  have  a  party  with  a  distinctive  name.  Without  a 
live  personality  about  whom  ideas  cluster,  it  is  doubtful 
whether  they  will  be  speedily  accepted.  There  were  Galileos 
and  Newtons  even  in  the  mathematical  sciences,  not  to  speak 
of  Luthers  and  Calvins  where  emotions  play  a  larger  part. 
There  is  inspiration  in  a  party  name.  Enthusiasm  and  hot 
discussion  were  later  aroused  by  these  same  ideas,  but  by  that 
time  it  had  become  customary  to  make  Herbart  the  spiritual 
leader. 

In  1890  Professor  DeGarmo  read  a  paper  on  the  relation  of 
instruction  to  will  training.  Herbart's  name  was  mentioned 
once.  The  discussion  which  followed  did  not  bear  on  the 
paper  at  all.  By  1892  the  Herbartian  adherents  had  won 
confidence  and  were  more  outspoken.  In  that  year  Mr.  Frank 
McMurry  read  a  paper  on  "The  Value  of  Herbartian  Pedagogy 
for  Normal  Schools."  He  believed  the  dislike  for  pedagogy 
was  due  to  lack  of  system,  declaring  that  writers  on  the  subject 
in  English  had  discussed  it  in  only  a  disconnected  way. 
Herbart  alone,  he  asserted,  had  ever  produced  a  system  of 
pedagogy  in  detail.  The  paper  bristles  with  the  words 
"Herbart"  and  "Herbartians."  The  reason  for  the  changed 
attitude  can  be  better  understood  when  we  have  glanced  over 
the  early  Herbartian  literature.  One  can  readily  see  how  the 
growth  of  literature  laid  a  firm  foundation  for  the  large  ad- 
vances to  be  spoken  of  shortly. 

Professor  DeGarmo  was  the  first  to  publish  works  upon 
Herbart.  "The  Essentials  of  Method,"  issued  in  1889,  was 
the  first  work  which  gave  an  extensive  account  of  any  Her- 
bartian doctrine.  Thru  it  American  teachers  had  access  to  a 
considerable  portion  of  Herbartianism,  especially  the  notion  of 
apperception  and  the  doctrine  of  formal  steps.  In  1890  he 
published  a  translation  of  Lindner's  "Empirical  Psychology. 
This  served  well  to  bring  the  spirit  of  Herbartian  psychology 
before  the  American  .public.  Access  to  some  of  Herbart's 
works  was  given  English-speaking  educators  thru  translations. 
In  1891  Herbart's  Psychology  was  translated  by  Miss  Smith 
and  published  in  the  series  edited  by  Dr.  Harris.  In  1892 
"The  Science  of  Education"  and  "The  Aesthetic  Revelation  of 
the  World"  were  translated  by  Mr.  and  Mrs.  Felkin  in  Eng- 


THE  DOCTRINES    OP   HERB  ART   IN   THE    UNITED    STATES       1 9 

land.  Dr.  Lukens  contributed  *'Herbart*s  Psychological 
Basis  of  Teaching"  to  Noss's  "Outlines  of  Psychology." 
In  1890  Charies  McMurry  wrote  "How  to  Conduct  the  Recita- 
tion." He  pubHshed  in  1891  "A  Geography  Plan  for  the 
Grades"  and  "Pioneer  History  Stories"  for  the  third  and 
fourth  grades.  The  first  original  American  work  coming  at  all 
near  a  systematic  presentation  of  the  whole  field  was  McMur- 
ry's  "Elements  of  General  Method  based  on  the  Principles  of 
Herbart,"  published  in  1892.  In  it  the  Ziller-Rein  interpreta- 
tions are  adapted  to  American  conditions.  The  ascendency 
of  that  interpretation  is  largely  due  to  the  able  and  sensible 
presentation  found  in  tfie  General  Method.  The  work  lays  a 
foundation  for  subsequent  developments.  Not  the  least  of 
its  merits  is  its  simplicity  of  style.  Rooper's  entertaining  and 
instructive  book,  "A  Pot  of  Green  Feathers,"  was  published  in 
1892.  Articles  by  Charles  McMurry,  Frank  McMurry,  Noss, 
Harris,  Brown,  Smith,  DeGarmo  and  others  began  to  appear, 
in  educational  periodicals.  Most  of  this  literature  was  of  an 
expository  sort. 

The  disciples  of  Herbart  now  sought  the  added  influence 
which  comes  thru  organization.  A  Herbart  Club  was  formed 
in  1892  for  the  purpose  of  "facilitating  the  spread  of  the  new 
ideas  and  to  promote  their  rational  application  in  school  work 
under  American  and  English  conditions."  An  especial  ser- 
vice of  the  association  was  the  translations  of  Herbartian 
literature.  Of  these  were  Lange's  "Apperception"  in  1893 
and  Ufer's  "Introduction  to  Herbart"  in  1894.  Both  books, 
and  especially  Lange's,  had  a  vast  influence  on  American 
thought. 

In  1895  a  more  ambitious  organization  was  formed  bear- 
ing the  name  of  "The  Herbart  Society  for  the  Scientific  Study 
of  Teaching,"  which  name  was  later  changed  to  "The  National 
Herbart  Society  for  the  Scientific  Study  of  Education."  Its 
purpose  was  to  give  the  doctrines  of  Herbart,  as  of  other  edu- 
cators, a  thoro  study  and  criticism,  "and  to  test  all  theories  by 
the  standard  of  usefulness  (19  :  205).  "Papers  were  presented  ^ 
and  discussed  before  the  society.  The  proceedings  were  pub-  f 
lished,  and  they  exerted  a  widespread  influence.  The  year- 
books are  especially  valuable  in  throwing  light  upon  the  de- 
velopment of  Herbartianism.  The  society  was  not  narrowly 
Herbartian.  Non-Herbartians  were  members  and  freely  de- 
bated the  questions  at  issue.  This  open  nature  of  the  pro- 
ceedings was  manifestly  for  the  best  interests  of  the  new  doc- 
trines, as  they  received  readier  hearing  and  a  more  searching 
criticism.  It  is  difficult  to  say  whether  the  usefulness  of  the 
society  was  due  more  to  the  avowed  disciples  or  to  those  who 
gave  the  movement  their  sympathetic  encouragement.  The 
noted  men  who  served  on  the  executive  committee  in  the  first 


20       THE   DOCTRINES    OF    HERBART   IN   THE    UNITED   STATES 

years  of  the  society's  history  did  not  all  profess  Herbartian- 
ism.  Of  the  committee  Charles  DeGarmo  was  president,  and 
the  other  members  were  N.  M.  Butler,  John  Dewey,  W.  S. 
Jackman,  E.  E.  Brown,  F.  M.  McMurry,  C.  A.  McMurry,  L. 
Seeley,  and  C.  C.  Van  Liew. 

During  the  first  three  years,  the  topics  were  purely  Her- 
bartian,  such  as  Interest,  Concentration,  Culture  Epochs.  In 
the  fourth  year,  there  was  a  partial  breaking  away  from  these 
topics,  and  subjects  not  distinctively  Herbartian  were  taken 
up.  The  organized  campaign  for  Herbartianism  is  unique  in 
American  educational  history.  Certainly  the  disciples  of  no 
other  educator  were  ever  so  well  organized  or  conducted  a 
campaign  with  so  much  energy. 

Herbartianism  was  not  allowed  to  enjoy  an  unchallenged 
triumphal  progress.  Its  right  to  the  field  was  disputed  with 
some  bitterness.  Before  the  Department  of  Superintendence, 
before  the  N.  E.  A.,  before  the  Herbart  Society,  and  in  the  edu- 
cational press,  there  were  sharp  conflicts  between  the  Her- 
bartian forces  and  their  opponents.  The  discussions  partly 
concerned  Herbartianism  in  a  general  way,  but  the  most  fruit- 
ful were  those  upon  specific  doctrines.  In  this  chapter  we 
shall  confine  our  attention  to  the  general  phases  of  the  Her- 
bartian movement* 

We  have  spoken  of  the  favorable  attitude  toward  German 
thought,  but  this  assertion  must  be  qualified  to  some  extent. 
\  There  are  always  those  who  resent  an5rthing  foreign  just  be- 
/  cause  it  is  foreign.  So  it  was  in  this  case.  In  one  of  the  ses- 
sions of  the  Herbart  Society,  an  opponent,  evidently  in  a 
belligerent  mood,  expressed  his  dislike  of  what  he  thought  was 
an  implication  that  there  was  in  this  country  no  philosophy  of 
education  "until  this  German  plant  was  brought  across  the 
sea  "  (First  Supplement  to  the  First  Year  Book  of  the  Herbart 
Society,  151).  The  Herbartians  often  took  occasion  to  defend 
themselves  by  the  counter  attack,  that  all  American  peda- 
gogy was  of  foreign  origin,  from  Locke,  Pestalozzi,  Spencer  and 
Froebel,  and  that  it  was  none  the  worse  for  that  fact.  In  line 
with  the  arguments  based  on  the  foreign  origin  were  tauntings 
of  servility  to  Herbart.  These  taunts  stung.  DeGarmo  in 
reply  made  the  remark,  "We  do  not  worship  our  ancestors, 
but  we  have  a  very  healthy  respect  for  them."  (as  above  152). 
The  meetings  were  characterized  as  storm  centers,  and,  even  in 
the  cold  printed  pages  of  the  reports,  one  can  see  that  feeling 
ran  high. 

We  may  believe  that  for  some  of  the  older  educators  this 
foreign  doctrine  was  the  more  obnoxious  because  the  men  who 
introduced  it  were  young  men.  They  are  referred  to  repeated- 
ly as  "a  group  of  young  men." 

Some  of  the  objections  just  mentioned  may  seem  trivial, 


ft 


THE    DOCTRINES    OF   HERBART   IN   THE    UNITED   STATES       21 

but  they  are  a  part  of  the  story  and  must  be  recorded.  Some- 
thing much  more  serious  might  have  come  of  them  if  the  op- 
ponents had  chanced  to  have  had  a  wit  in  their  number  who 
could  have  raised  such  a  laugh  at  the  expense  of  the  Her- 
bartians  as  to  have  seriously  hindered  progress  for  sometime. 
There  is  no  mistaking  the  fact  that  for  a  short  time  the  Her- 
bartians  were  put  upon  the  defensive.  However,  no  wit  was 
forthcoming.  This  sort  of  argument  against  the  Herbartians 
did  not  cease  at  once.  Later  G.  Stanley  Hall  criticised  the 
movement  to  the  extent  that  too  many  regarded  the  Her- 
bartian  pedagogy  as  the  "consummate  formulation  of  educa- 
tional theory  and  have  tried  to  apply  its  rubrics  blindly  to 
different  American  conditions"  (33  :  Introduction).  The 
criticism  was  asserted  to  be  groundless  by  those  at  whom  it 
was  aimed. 

In  the  sessions  of  the  Herbart  Society  and  of  theNational 
Educational  Association,  there  were  a  number  of  non-Her- 
bartians  who  argued  against  the  new  movement,  not  simply 
because  it  was  foreign  but  in  a  different  spirit.  One  line  of  at- 
tack was  against  its  philosophical  presuppositions.  To 
abandon  them  entirely  was  the  easiest  way  to  meet  these  ob- 
jections, in  which  case  the  arguments  came  to  naught.  In 
this  phase,  W.  T.  Harris  was  the  notable  opponent.  The 
philosophers  could  get  themselves  into  all  sorts  of  difficulties 
by  following  out  what  they  thought  was  Herbart' s  philosophy, 
and  could  show  that  it  ran  into  all  sorts  of  absurdities.  The 
Herbartians  did  not  pride  themselves  on  being  philosophers, 
and  hence  did  not  have  so  many  troubles.  It  is  significant  for 
Herbartianism  in  America  that,  from  the  outset,  the  meta- 
physical psychology  of  Herbart  was  denied  a  determining 
place  in  educational  thought.  The  emphasis  was  put  upon 
the  purely  pedagogical  doctrines,  even  tho  the  metaphysical 
support  which  Herbart  had  created  for  them  might  be  re- 
jected. We  can  illustrate  the  position  by  quoting  directly 
from  Herbartians  and  non- Herbartians.  In  the  course  of  the 
early  discussions,  George  P.  Brown  said,  "I  do  not  understand 
it  (Herbartianism)  to  be  a  system  of  metaphysics  at  all,  but  a 
method."  "Herbartian  metaphysics  I  can  find  no  use  for." 
"Herbartian  psychology  seems  to  me  to  have  little  inspiration 
in  it"  (First  Year  Book,  First  Supplement,  141).  Col.  Parker 
declared,  "The  Herbartian  doctrine  is  a  working  hypothesis — 
the  best  working  hypothesis  ever  presented  for  the  study  of 
teachers;"  (Same  153-155).  Dr.  Harris:  "His  usefulness  in 
education  is  proportioned  to  his  uselessness  as  a  philosopher  " 
(N.  E.  A.  1895,  345).  N.  M.  Butler  said,  "It  is  undoubtedly 
true  that  we  cannot  accept  Herbart's  psychology  as  a  satis- 
factory explanation  of  mental  life,  but  it  is  not  necessary  in 
order  to  secure  the  benefit  of  the  educational  theory  and  the 


2  2       THE    DOCTRINES    OF   HERBART   IN   THE    UNITED   STATES 

educational  practice  that  bears  Herbart's  name"  (N.  E.  A. 
1895,  349).  A  year  or  so  later  Professor  DeGarmo  stated 
what  was  the  probable  attitude  of  American  Herbartians, 
when  he  spoke  of  the  confidence  in  the  doctrine  of  interest,  but 
asserted  that  they  do  not  feel  called  upon  "to  break  any 
lances  in  behalf  of  Herbart's  psychology"  (24  :  141). 

Along  with  the  criticism,  there  was  praise  for  the  Her- 
bartians who  were  spoken  of  as  "the  most  modest  of  men." 
One  remarked  truly,  "These  young  men  have  set  the  teachers 
to  thinking"  (First  Year  Book,  First  Supplement,  143).  Col. 
Parker  gave  it  his  warmest  encouragment,  for  he  believed  no 
subject  had  arisen  which  afforded  so  much  food  for  thought. 
He  referred  to  the  Herbartians  as  "the  distinguished  teachers 
who  have  spent  several  years  at  Jena  studying  under  the  fa- 
mous Dr.  Rein"  (Same  153).  Hall,  in  the  introduction  to 
Dorpfeldt's  "Connection  between  Thought  and  Memory," 
spoke  of  these  same  men  as  "a  choice  group  of  young  Americans 
who  have  studied  in  a  post-graduate  and  professional  way  in 
Europe  and  at  home"  (33  :  Intro  IX). 

It  was  not  long  before  the  movement  had  reached  "the 
second  stage  in  the  progress  of  new  truth,"  as  one  speaker 
rather  facetiously  remarked.  The  three  stages  he  had  in  mind 
are: first,  "It  is  impossible;"  second,  "There  is  nothing  new  in 
it;"  and  third,  "I  always  believed  it." 

Before  going  farther,  it  may  be  well  to  note  who  were  the 
Herbartians.  In  the  earlier  discussions,  there  were  a  certain 
number  who  always  said  "we."  These  were  evidently 
Herbartians.  They  numbered  such  as  DeGarmo,  theMcMur- 
rys,  Lukens,  Van  Liew.  There  were  others  who  said  "they." 
Those  who  used  this  pronoun,  altho  in  some  points  they  may 
have  shared  Herbartian  views,  preferred  not  to  profess  disci- 
pleship.  Parker  and  Harris  were  in  this  group.  There  was 
still  another  class  who  employed  neither  of  these  pronouns, 
but  w^ho  nevertheless  busied  themselves  with  educational 
problems  along  lines  of  Herbartian  thought.  Among  these 
were  Dewey  and  Butler.  At  best,  Herbartianism  is  a  collec- 
tive term.  It  is  not  necessary  to  call  anyone  an  Herbartian  if 
he  does  not  want  to  be  so  called.  The  principles  provoked 
thought  and  were  in  turn  changed  by  the  discussion.  As  that 
is  the  most  important  thing  we  shall  draw  into  our  treatment 
any  man  who  may  have  played  a  part  in  these  events. 

To  turn  to  the  more  positive  features  of  the  movement,  an 
interesting  line  of  argument  lay  in  showing  acceptance  of 
Herbart  to  be  a  necessary  step  for  Pestalozzians  to  take. 
Eckoff  argued  (33  :  39)  that  Herbartianism  should  supplant 
the  ruling  pedagogy,  because  it  is  explanatory  whilePestaloz- 
zi's  pedagogy  is  only  inductive.  Pestalozzi  was  the  Kepler  of 
pedagogy,  but  Herbart  is  the  Newton.     Dr.  Harris  likewise 


THE   DOCTRINES    OF   HERBART   IN   TH1E    UNITED    STATES       23 

looked  upon  Herbart's  theories  as  being  supplementary  to 
Pestalozzi's.  If  the  American  pedagogy  was  on  a  Pestaloz- 
zian  basis,  and  if  it  was  true  as  claimed  by  the  Herbartians 
that  Herbart  was  a  completion  and  development  of  the  Swiss 
educator,  it  would  be  the  logical  thing  for  Americans  to  take 
the  step  Herbart  took.  This  argument  was  pressed  with 
energy. 

Of  necessity,  much  of  the  work  of  the  disciples  in  the 
early  daj^s  was  the  clearing  up  of  misunderstandings  and  con- 
fusions which  were  bound  to  arise.  Some  were  due  to  the  way 
people  understood.  Sometimes  the  advocates  were  not  clear 
in  their  own  minds.  ■  It  is  not  surprising  that  there  was  con- 
siderable superficiality  in  the  early  discussions.  It  was  to  the 
advantage  of  the  cause  that  its  opponents  forced  those  who 
professed  discipleship  to  study  and  to  consider  more  deeply 
the  nature  of  the  real  teaching.  The  fact  that  Herbartianism 
was  introduced  in  its  principles  merely,  leaving  the  details  of 
practice  unemphasized,  is  partially  responsible  for  mistaken 
ideas.  The  applications  of  the  principles  were  left  to  the  good 
sense  of  the  teachers.  If  the  introduction  in  the  form  of  ab- 
stract principles,  instead  of  concrete  rules  of  procedure, 
brought  the  danger  of  misconception,  it  also  brought  ad- 
vantages. Herbartianism  was  saved  from  the  kind  of  narrow 
practical  devices  under  which  the  kindergarten  suffered  much. 
The  principles  made  teachers  think.  A  breadth  of  view  was 
also  guaranteed,  because  the  comprehension  of  wide-reaching 
principles  makes  the  educator  take  a  point  of  view  overlooking 
the  whole  field.  After  all,  it  must  be  considered  the  good  for- 
tune of  Herbartianism  to  have  been  introduced  in  its  prin- 
ciples, even  if  it  thereby  suffered  somewhat  in  their  applica- 
tion. 

Herbartian  theory  had  the  further  advantage  of  being 
developed  from  the  outset  in  contact  with  children.  This  was 
true  in  its  native  land  as  well  as  in  America.  The  American 
practical  spirit  showed  itself  when  it  came  to  dealing  with 
pedagogy,  as  well  as  in  business.     Arr\f^r\ra-n^  rji^  r^nt  allow 

Herbn,rtlRn^'sm,   •'•'^  ^•^^•"'^   nn  n   finn  i-Vinr^-ry    Kii-(-  crMTgrT^f  of  t^-f\^i:^  t^ 

see  if  it^ would  work.  Newness  should  not  intimidate  Ameri- 
~fcans,  of  all  people, Tor  they  are  used  to  new  things — ^new  tools, 
new  inventions,  to  throwing  the  old  away  and  giving  the  new  a 
trial.  Pearson,  in  "National  Life  and  Character,"  points  out 
this  characteristic  in  contrast  with  the  European,  saying  "that 
in  England  the  mental  attitude  is,  'This  can  not  amount  to 
anything  or  it  would  have  been  discovered  long  ago ;  while  in 
America  the  attitude  is,  'If  this  invention  is  a  good  thing,  or 
this  process  is  valuable,  we  want  it'"  (Quoted  in  Ed.  Rev.  24 
25 :) .  The  obvious  danger  is  that  the  new  be  given  too  short  a 
trial. 


24       THE    DOCTRINES    OF   HERBART   IN   THE    UNITED   STATES 

In  the  case  of  'He.rhart^fi.^^^fi^n,  the.  r.rit,i<;-fl|  .SPa„SO^  -Safely 
pa^sen,JJae.mo vement-Sjireajll^^idly -  All  the  agencies  for  its 
Jfop^agation  were  in  activity.  At  the  close  of  the  first  year 
the  Secretary  of  the  Herbart  Society  reported  a  paying  mem- 
bership of  seven  hundred.  Notices  of  the  organization  of  lo- 
cal clubs  for  the  study  of  Herbart  were  received  every  week 
(First  Year  Book,  Second  Supplement  :  252).  Plans  for  sys- 
tematic study  were  followed  by  these  clubs.  Herbartian  prin- 
ciples found  a  favorable  reception  in  the  Normal  Schools,  for 
Jena-trained  Herbartians  taught  in  them  in  several  states. 
Likewise,  Herbartian  pedagogy  was  a  subject  of  study  in 
colleges  and  universities.  As  early  as  1891-92,  E.  E.  Brown 
had  lectured  on  Herbart  in  the  University  of  Michigan.  The 
Herbartian  literature  increased  in  volume.  To  the  writings  of 
Herbart  already  accessible  to  English  readers  were  added 
"The  A.  B.  C.  of  Sense  Perception,"  translated  in  1896,  and 
"The  Outlines  of  Educational  Doctrine."  The  translation  of 
Rein's  "Outlines  of  Pedagogics"  in  1893  was  an  important  ad- 
dition to  the  list  of  Herbartian  books  written  by  Germans.  A 
large  number  were  written  by  Americans  and  English.  Many 
articles  appeared  in  the  leading  educational  magazines.  As 
time  went  on,  the  literature  became  less  expository  and  more 
critical  and  constructive. 

As  a  consequence  of  all  this  activity,  Herbart' s  name  was 
known  everywhere.  Indeed,  Herbartianism  spread  like  a 
contagion.  The  United  States  Commissioner  in  his  report  of 
1894-5,  said,  "Xhexe  are  at  present  more  adherents  of  Herbart 
in  tb  f  I  ^ri  i  ted  vStateR,  than  in  Germ  a  n  y "  (U.  S.  Com.  of  Ed. 
Report  94  :  '5  :  322).  He  attributed  this  fact  to  the  greater 
freedom  of  discussion  in  America.  An  educator  writing  in 
1896  characterized  the  situation  by  saying  it  was  .hardly  .p_os- 
sible  to  attend  an  educational  gathering  of  fair  pretensions  to 
magnitude  or  dignity  without  at  least  hearing  Herbart's  name 
^55  :  Int.  XIII).  American  educators  have  begun  to  five, 
move,  and  have  their  being  in  an  atmosphere  of  Herbartian- 
ism" (55  :  Int.  XIV).  Looking  at  it  from  one  angle,  it  is  a 
veritable  renaissance.  Viewed  from  another  angle,  the  im- 
pression is  that  Herbart  had  become  the  fashion.  In  America 
and  in  the  rest  of  the  world,  too,  much  goes  by  fashion.  In 
this  respect  Herbartianism  shared  the  fate  of  child  study. 
In  some  ways  it  is  unfortunate  that  such  serious  matters  as 
educational  principles  should  be  subject  to  fashion.  Doubtless 
Herbartianism' s  very  popularity  repelled  some,  but,  just  as 
with  child  study,  after  many  had  been  repelled  and  grown 
tired,  there  still  remained  a  large  body  of  earnest  students  and 
disciples.  Alexander  Darroch,  the  Scotch  professor,  must 
have  been  viewing  Herbart  in  America  in  1902  from  this 
second  angle  when  he  said,  "To  some  extent  in  the  land  of  its 


THE   DOCTRINES    OF   HERBART    IN    THE    UNIT'ED    STATES       2$ 

birth,  but  more  particularly  in  America,  Herbartianism  has 
become  more  or  less  of  a  craze"  (12  :  2) .  The  truth  probably 
is  that  it  partook  of  the  nature  of  both  a  fashion  and  a  peda- 
gogical renaissance. 

It  will  be  profitable  to  turn  from  the  general  view  to  a 
closer  study  of  the  different  doctrines,  for  it  was  by  special  at- 
tention to  the  separate  topics  that  American  teachers  became 
familiar  with  Herbartianism.  Such  attempts  as  Soldan's  to 
give  a  survey  of  the  whole  system  as  a  system,  were  bound  to 
be  fruitless  before  well  into  the  nineties.  The  American  read- 
er and  hearer  were  not  prepared  to  grasp  the  whole  system  at 
once.  Moreover,  certain  topics  were  better  adapted  for  first 
introduction  than  were  others.  Those  topics  which  were 
most  concrete  or  which  had  closest  resemblance  to  current 
American  pedagogical  activity  were  the  first  to  receive  intelli- 
gent attention,  even  tho  they  were  not  first  in  the  logically  con- 
structed system.  The  doctrines  were  introduced  one  after 
another  in  order  of  concreteness  and  adaptation  to  the  prepar- 
ation of  the  American  teacher.  Thus  the  first  discussions  cen- 
tered around  method,  then  apperception,  and  next  concentra- 
tion took  the  most  prominent  place,  to  yield  in  turn  to  the 
doctrine  of  interest.  It  is  more  difficult  to  say  when  the  doc- 
trine of  culture  epochs  and  of  aim  received  the  most  attention. 
All  the  topics  were  discussed  more  or  less  every  year,  but  dur- 
ing certain  years  the  major  part  of  the  attention  was  given  to 
some  special  topics. 


26      THE   DOCTRINES    OF   HERBART   IN   THE    UNITED   STATES 

CHAPTER  III. 

THE    EDUCATIONAL    AIM,    THE    AIM    OF    INSTRUCTION,  AND    THE 
COURSE   OF   STUDY 

"The  one  problem,  the  whole  problem  of  education,  may- 
be comprised  in  a  single  concept — morality."  With  these 
words  Herbart  has  announced  the  aim  of  education.  He  fol- 
lowed the  spirit  of  the  Kantian  assertion  that  there  is  nothing 
good  but  a  good  will.  Herbart  defined  the  good  will  more 
closely  by  representing  it  as  having  five  phases  which  he  called 
the  five  ideas  or  pictures  of  the  will,  the  idea  of  inner  freedom, 
of  completeness,  of  good  will,  of  rights,  and  of  equity.  Ameri- 
can thinkers  were  prepared  for  a  lofty  conception  of  educa- 
tion. The  high  ideals  which  the  Pestalozzian  wave  had  intro- 
duced were  common  property,  in  theory  at  least,  however 
much  of  a  hold  the  notion  of  making  an  economic  success  may 
have  had  on  practice.  "Character  building"  was  a  common 
expression  before  the  advent  of  Herbartianism.  In  the  opin- 
ion of  Button,  the  concept  was  often  sentimental,  but  Herbart 
made  it  "Scientific"  (35  :  53-58). 

The  educator  can  contribute  to  moral  character  thru  the 
will,  permanently  influencing  it  in  three  ways — thru  training, 
thru  government,  and  thru  instruction.  The  greatest  Her- 
bartian  contribution  was  in  showing  how  knowledge  could  di- 
rectly influence  morality.  Beside  the  aim  of  education,  there 
is  a  more  immediate  aim  for  instruction,  which  is  the  building 
of  such  a  moral-religious  circle  of  thought  that  a  good  will  may 
result  from  it.  Or,  since  the  will  follows  the  interest,  it  is  a 
degree  better  to  say  that  the  aim  of  instruction  is  to  awaken 
interest.  An  ideal  character  requires  that  a  many-sided  in- 
terest be  produced.  The  final  aim  of  instruction  is  morality, 
but  the  nearer  aim,  which  instruction  in  particular  must  set 
before  itself  in  order  to  reach  the  final  one,  is  a  many-sided 
interest  (59  :  62) . 

The  great  influence  and  popularity  of  Professor  James 
prepared  the  way  for  the  acceptance  of  certain  points  con- 
nected with  the  Herbartian  notion  of  the  educational  aim. 
The  Herbartians  needed  just  the  sort  of  psychology  to  which 
James  gave  expression  on  the  question  of  the  relation  of 
knowledge  to  will  and  conduct,  for  example,  "My  thinking 
is  first  and  last  and  always  for  the  sake  of  my  doing"  (70  :  383) . 
In  fact,  the  whole  pragmatic  movement  in  American  philoso- 
phy gave  a  powerful  support  to  the  Herbartian  aim  and  the 
way  of  its  realization  thru  instruction.  Pierce  wrote,  "The 
whole  function  of  thinking  is  but  one  step  in  the  production  of 
habits  of  action"  (Quoted  in  Jr.  of  Ped.  19  :  43).     Dewey's 


THE    DOCTRINES    OF    HERBART    IN    THE    UNITEDSTATES       27 

Statement  that  "ideas  result  from  action  and  develop  for  the 
sake  of  better  control  of  action  "  (31  :  15)  fortifies  the  Her- 
bartian  views  and  also  contains  a  concept  which  gives  a  new 
tendency  to  American  Herbartianism. 

In  the  first  popularization  of  the  aim  of  education  in  the 
United  States  there  were  analyses  of  character  not  so  very 
different  from  those  in  vogue  before  the  introduction  of 
Herbartianism  (26).  The  five  pictures  of  the  will  were  at  no 
time  more  than  mere  words,  mentioned  in  a  sort  of  perfunctory 
way.  The  writers  did  not  seem  to  know  how  to  make  them 
useful.  Other  ideas,  such  as  serviceableness  and  preparation 
for  good  citizenship,  take  their  place.  The  whole  tendency 
of  the  American  formulation  has  been  in  the  direction  of  less 
precise  definition.  It  has  tended  toward  more  general  des- 
criptions which  are  more  in  keeping  with  the  first  chapter  of 
Paulsen's  Ethics  than  with  the  Ethics  of  Herbart.  Since 
American  public  schools  do  not  impart  religious  instruction,  it 
is  natural  that  the  religious  phase  of  the  moral-religious  aim 
has  not  been  emphasized.    " 

The  American  attitude  toward  the  German  classification 
of  interest,  such  as  Rein's  six  classes  of  interest,  is  not  unlike 
the  attitude  toward  the  pictures  of  the  will.  In  the  early  des- 
cussions  the  German  presentation  was  followed,  but  with  time 
the  classification  of  interests  became  more  and  more  neglected. 
The  American,  like  the  English,  mind  is  more  interested  in 
particulars  than  in  elaborate  generalizations.  The  individual 
man  is  deemed  of  far  more  consequence  than  any  abstract 
classifications  of  his  interests.  Consequently,  it  was  thought 
desirable  to  create  specific  interests  thru  instruction. 

Standing  immediately  in  the  way  of  any  large  progress  in 
the  direction  of  the  Herbartian  aim  was  the  centuries-old  doc- 
trine of  formal  discipline.  We  have  in  a  preceding  chapter 
noted  the  hold  this  theory  had  upon  pedagogical  thought  in 
America.  This  doctrine  must  be  dislodged  from  its  position. 
The  Herbartians  criticised  the  doctrine  severely,  arguing  that 
it  v/as  based  upon  a  faculty  theory  of  the  mind,  which  psy- 
chologists since  the  days  of  Herbart  had  rejected.  It  was  ar- 
gued further,  largely  from  experience,  that  educators  should  fol- 
low the  psychologists  and  discard  an  educational  theory  which 
rested  on  a  false  psychology.  As  an  outcome,  the  doctrine  of 
formal  discipline  was  abandoned  by  the  leaders  in  education, 
tho  it  kept  its  hold  upon  much  of  the  school  room  practice. 
Gradually  but  sullenly  the  doctrine  that  subjects  should  be  se- 
lected for  their  disciplinary  value  has  been  yielding  the  field. 
As  the  old  doctrine  gives  way,  room  is  made  for  the  exercise  of 
saner  selective  principles. 

Another  of  the  older  conceptions  of  the  aim  of  education 
which  did  not  harmonize  with  the  Herbartian  was  that  of 


28       THE    DOCTRINES    OF    HERBART    IN    THE    UNITED    STATES 

** rounded  development,"  but  the  criticism  against  it  was  not 
so  severe  as  against  the  doctrine  of  formal  discipline.  It  was 
enough  to  point  out  the  indefiniteness  of  such  a  view,  for,  all  in 
all,  it  was  comparatively  harmless  and  had  a  good  side,  too, 
namely,  to  serve  as  a  text  to  arouse  enthusiasm,  even  if  little  of 
a  definite  nature  came  of  it.  Finally,  some' held  that  educa- 
tion should  aim  at  the  practical;  but,  as  we  shall  see,  Her- 
bartians  only  needed  to  qualify  this  aim  to  make  it  do  service 
in  the  direction  of  their  own. 

The  most  positive  American  contribution  has  been  to  em- 
phasize a  social  aim.  In  the  early  discussions,  both  in  Ger- 
many and  in  America,  the  Kantian  ethics  was  the  source  of  in- 
spiration for  the  treatment  of  the  will,  and  hence  the  educa- 
tional aim ;  but  in  later  years,  in  America,  sociology  has  exerted 
by  far  the  greater  influence,  and  has  contributed  a  new  and 
widening  concept.  Education  should  result  in  a  livelier  social 
consciousness  and  in  more  efficient  social  activities.  Since 
1900  the  new  view  of  education  has  become  very  prominent  in 
educational  literature.  The  Herbart  Society  was  recognized 
as  chiefly  responsible  for  the  enthusiastic  effort  to  interpret 
education  socially  (68   :  12,  231). 

It  would  be  wrong  to  say,  as  some  did,  that  Herbart's  aim. 
was  entirely  individualistic,  for  there  is  sufficient  evidence  in 
his  own  writings  to  disprove  such  a  notion.  He  maintained 
that  psychology  remains  incomplete  as  long  as  it  considers 
man  only  as  an  isolated  individual.  Again,  he  advocated 
placing  human  conditions  and  relationships  in  the  foreground 
of  instruction  (59  :  25).  Still  it  is  probably  true  that  the 
original  conception  does  not  put  sufficient  emphasis  upon  the 
pupil  as  a  member  of  a  social  group.  When  this  side  is 
brought  into  prominence,  the  center  of  gravity  is  changed  so 
that  it  could  be  said  that  the  religious-moral  aim  of  the  Her- 
bartians  is  socialized.  Recently  it  has  become  quite  common 
to  express  this  widening  view  of  the  educational  aim  as  "edu- 
cation for  adjustment,"  since  this  new  aim  demands  a  closer 
correlation  of  school  work  with  social  life. 

Right  here  lies  the  chief  practical  importance  of  an  aim, 
namely,  that  it  serve  as  a  selective  principle  in  making  up  the 
curriculum.  Courses  of  study  will  differ  with  the  varying  aims 
of  education  held  by  those  who  make  them.  What  material 
shall  constitute  the  course  of  study?  is  the  question  which 
presses  immediately  when  the  aim  has  been  determined  and 
the  possibility  of  education  thru  instruction  has  been  estab- 
lished. Those  studies  must  be  chosen  which  will  realize  the 
educational  aim,  since  it  is  in  this  way  that  the  aim  becomes  a 
standard  of  selection.  The  Herbartians  introduced  the  fruit- 
ful term  "educative  instruction"  to  express  this  idea — an  ex- 
pression only  too  little  used. 


THE   DOCTRINES    OF    HERBART   IN    THE    UNITED    STATES       29 

One  of  the  immediate  consequences  of  abandoning  the 
formal  discipHne  point  of  view  was  a  new  attitude  to  the  three 
Rs.  A  classification  was  made  into  content  studies  and  form 
studies.  The  former  were  of  primary  importance,  for  they 
could  contribute  to  the  circle  of  thought  and  the  building  of 
interests.  The  position  of  form  studies,  such  as  reading,  gram- 
mar, and  arithmetic,  in  the  curriculum,  is  justified  by  their  ser- 
vice to  the  content  studies.  They  hold  a  subordinate,  altho 
essential  position.  The  way  for  such  a  view  was  prepared  in  a 
small  measure  byHuxley  and  Lubbock  who  considered  the 
three  Rs  only  a  means  and  not  an  end  in  themselves.  The 
general  tendency,  since  the  advent  of  Herbartianism,  has  been 
to  give  the  content  studies  an  increasing  and  the  form  studies  a 
diminishing  place. 

The  new  conception  of  the  aim  of  education  has  resulted 
in  great  changes  in  the  curriculum.  Especially  the  emphasis 
of  the  social  side  has  led  to  a  broadening  of  the  course  of  study. 
In  the  preceding  era  Herbert  Spencer  and  the  scientists 
pleaded  for  the  natural  sciences  because  of  their  utility. 
Following  up  the  work  of  Spencer  the  Herbartians  demand  a 
large  place  for  the  sciences  as  having  a  practical  importance  for 
members  of  society.  They  have  given  a  higher  meaning  to 
utility  and  have  widened  its  concept.  History,  literature,  and 
the  arts,  as  well  as  the  sciences  and  manual  activities,  are  prac- 
tical, because  they  may  result  in  social  interests  and  social 
character.  Thus,  the  new  aim  has  shown  a  breadth  which 
none  of  the  others  have. 

Moreover,  its  value  in  determining  what  shall  be  omitted 
from  the  curriculum  is  recognized.  At  a  time  when  so  many 
subjects  are  pressing  into  the  curriculum  so  as  to  overburden 
pupils,  lengthen  the  course,  and  result  in  superficial  work, 
there  is  need  of  an  aim  that  is  selective  in  a  double  sense: 
choosing  what  ought  to  be  included  and  rejecting  all  that  is 
not  of  most  worth.  It  is  quite  generally  agreed  that  the  final 
test  of  the  fitness  of  each  study  for  the  curriculum  is  its 
possession  of  a  "plain  relation  to  some  need  of  life,  either  ethical 
or  utilitarian  in  the  narrow  sense"  (88  :  197) . 

With  German  Herbartians  the  material  for  educative  in- 
struction belongs  either  to  the  historical  or  to  the  natural 
science  series.  The  former  is  considered  especially  valuable 
in  forming  the  disposition.  Dr.  Rein  shows  how  both  are  re- 
lated to  the  will,  the  first  by  revealing  what  ought  to  be  or 
ought  not  to  be,  and  the  second  by  showing  what  can  or  can  not 
be  done.  This  classification  has  been  especially  valuable  in 
drawing  attention  to  the  educational  aim.  Altho  its  practical 
worth  was  recognized  by  Americans,  yet  they  took  liberties 
either  in  the  direction  of  dissolving  all  classification  (in  a 
measure,  Col.  Parker)  or  by  increasing  the  groups  (De  Garmo). 


30       THE   DOCTRINES    OF   HERBART   IN   THE    UNITED   STATES 

The  tendency  was  also  away  from  making  a  distinction  be- 
tween the  educative  work  of  the  natural  science  and  the 
historical  series.  The  view  has  grown  that  whatever  can  be 
brought  into  the  service  of  man  has  its  social  side.  The  in- 
terest awakened  is  not  merely  speculative.  Dr.  Dewey  and 
others  have  shown  how  the  study  of  things  may  be  brought  in- 
to a  closer  relation  with  the  educational  aim  than  had  been 
previously  realized. 

There  was  much  said  and  written  under  the  head  of  an 
enriched  course  of  study.  The  notable  addresses  of  President 
Eliot  may  be  cited  as  evidence  of  interest  in  it.  Undoubtedly 
this  movement  helped  along  the  Herbartian  views  for  recasting 
the  elementary  curriculum  in  the  interest  of  the  aim  of  educa- 
tion. 

An,  intelligent  comprehension  of  the  educational  aim 
alone  is  not  a  sufficient  guide  for  the  making  of  a  complete 
course  of  study.  One  can  say  in  a  general  way  what  subjects 
ought  to  be  in  the  curriculum,  but  in  order  to  be  specific  in 
details  and  to  find  those  subjects  which  will  realize  the  aim, 
other  principles  of  selection  must  be  found.  Their  use,  how- 
ever, must  always  be  with  an  eye  single  to  the  aim  of  education. 

Special  attention  must  be  given  to  two  questions  of  great 
importance  to  the  realization  of  the  aim:  the  proper  sequence 
of  the  studies  and  the  different  portions  of  each  study.  If  we 
borrow  a  term  from  the  laboratory  we  may  say  the  answer  to 
the  first  question  deals  with  the  longitudinal  section  of  the 
course  of  study;  the  second  concerns  the  relation  between  the 
subjects  taught  and,  to  keep  the  figure,  would  deal  with  suc- 
cessive cross  sections  of  the  course  of  study.  The  Herbar- 
tians,  especially  of  the  Ziller-Rein  wing,  found  an  answer  for 
the  first  question  in  the  culture  epoch  theory,  and  for  the 
second  in  the  theory  of  concentration.  Of  course,  the  edu- 
cational value  of  subjects  will  be  determined  to  a  certain  ex- 
tent by  these  new  principles.  Not  only  the  question  of  suc- 
qession,  but  also  what  has  been  said  thus  far  about  educational 
values,  is  treated  by  Rein  in  connection  with  the  culture  epoch 
theory.  We  mirror  American  practice  better  in  giving  a  less 
prominent  place  to  the  culture  epoch  theory  and  in  considering 
the  choice  of  studies  in  immediate  connection  with  the  aim. 
The  chief  importance  of  all  the  Herbartian  doctrines  except 
one,  lies  in  their  relation  to  the  selection  and  arrangement  of 
the  studies  in  the  curriculum.  Therefore,  not  only  the  chap- 
ters on  the  culture  epoch  theory  and  concentration,  but  also 
those  on  interest  and  apperception  are  concerned,  implicitly  at 
least,  with  principles  of  selection. 

It  is  the  genuis  of  Herbartianism  to  attach  the  greatest 
possible  importance  to  the  educational  aim  and  the  aim  of 
instruction.     It  is  significant  that  Herbart's  greatest  peda- 


THE   DOCTRINES    OF    HERBART   IN   THE    UNITED    STATES       3 1 

gogical  work  bore  the  title  "General  Pedagogy  Deduced  from 
its  Aim."  The  aim  determines  all  educational  procedure, 
since  the  system  grows  out  of  the  aim.  Some  modifications 
which  one  may  observe  in  American  Herbartianism  may  be 
traced  to  an  American  tendency  to  change  the  aim  or  to  lose 
sight  of  it  while  discussing  individual  principles. 


32       THE   DOCTRINES   OF   HERBART   IN   THE   UNITED   STATES 

CHAPTER  IV. 

THE  DOCTRINE  OF  APPERCEPTION 

Of  all  the  Herbartian  principles,  the  doctrine  of  apper- 
ception was  the  one  most  readily  accepted,  because  it  could  be 
appreciated  independently  of  the  other  doctrines  of  the  sys- 
tem. It  was  widely  discussed  and  expounded.  The  first 
public  work  of  the  Herbart  Club  was  the  translation  and  pub- 
lication of  Lange's  "Apperception"  in  1892.  They  beUeved  it 
the  best  book  to  introduce  the  young  teacher  to  the  new  edu- 
cational thought  (75  :  Int.  VIII) .  The  editor  wrote  of  this 
work,  "His  book  will  interest  the  simplest  and  instruct  the 
wisest  "  (75  :  Int.  VII).  Rooper's  "Pot  of  Green  Feathers"  was 
republished  in  America,  and  its  very  title  popularized  the 
notion  of  apperception.  Dr.  Harris  saw  in  Eckoff'  transla- 
tion of  Herbart's  "A.  B.  C.  of  Sense  Perception"  a  contribu- 
tion to  apperception.  All  new  pedagogical  books  had  promi- 
nent chapters  on  it.  The  leaders  in  education,  among  them 
Dr.  Harris,  thought  Herbart  supplemented  Pestalozzi  with  this 
concept,  for  Pestalozzi  was  not  credited  with  taking  into  ac- 
count previous  experience  as  an  aid  to  perception.  At  that 
point,  then,  Herbart  supplements  Pestalozzi  with  the  idea  of 
apperception  which  is  esteemed  of  far  more  importance  than 
Pestalozzi 's  contribution.  No  other  one  topic  called  forth  a 
like  quantity  of  discussion  in  the  early  nineties. 

For  a  short  time,  it  almost  appeared  that  the  general  edu- 
cational public  identified  Herbartianism  and  this  doctrine. 
At  the  meeting  of  the  Department  of  Superintendence  in  1891, 
Dr.  Harris  referred  to  the  "Herbartians  whose  great  word  is 
apperception"  (U.  S.  Com.  of  Ed.  Report  92-'3  :  505).  In 
1892  the  Superintendent  of  Public  Instruction  for  Missouri 
called  Herbart  "the  apostle  of  apperception"  (Same  :  1658). 
At  a  pedagogical  conference  Harris  said:  "The  idea  of  apper- 
ception is  the  most  important  fruit  thus  far  developed  by  the 
study  of  the  psychology  of  pedagogy"  (Quoted  in  Int.  to 98). 
At  a  later  date  he  wrote  that  Herbart  deserved  the  study  of 
the  teacher  because  of  his  "painstaking  investigation  of 
branches  of  study  in  view  of  their  value  as  material  of  apper- 
ception" (55  :  Preface). 

The  notion  of  acquiring  new  ideas  by  the  aid  of  old  ideas 
already  in  the  mind,  appealed  to  the  common  sense  of  teachers. 
Of  course  they  had  been  using  the  principle  all  their  lives. 
American  psychologists  had  taught  much  of  its  truth  under 
the  head  of  such  terms  as  assimilation  and  association,  but 
the  new  term  brought  the  truth  to  a  conscious  focus  in  the 
every  day  school  work.  Its  aim  was  to  make  instruction  in- 
teresting and  was  a  key  to  memory.     A  knowledge  of  apper- 


((  ^^2cKt 

THE   DOCTRINES    OF    HERBART    IN    THE    UNITED    STATES       33I'    y)t*^'^^f 

ception  helped  in  determining  the  arrangements  of  topics  and  ^  ' "" 
the  association  of  studies.  It  could  be  used  in  all  these  di- 
rections even  by  teachers  who  were  not  aware  that  its  primary- 
function  was  to  assure  the  basis  for  right  interests.  The  result 
was  its  diligent  use  in  the  school  room.  David  Salmon, 
writing  in  1900  on  "Impressions  of  American  Education," 
says,  "I  found  everywhere  the  theory  of  apperception  not  a 
dead  dogma  receiving  mere  tacit  assent  (like  the  Athanasian 
creed),  but  a  living  principle"  (Ed.  Rev.  19  :  38). 

The  theory  met  with  practically  no  adverse  criticism. 
Some  of  the  older  pedagogs  thought  there  was  too  much  ado 
made  over  it.  Some  psychologists  discredited  the  term. 
Professor  James  thought  psychology  could  very  easily  dis- 
pense with  the  word  (70  :  320) .  It  is  significant  that,  at  least 
by  implication,  he  admits  the  importance  and  usefulness  of 
apperception  for  pedagogy.  A  more  serious  objection,  made 
more  recently,  tends  to  give  certain  reasonable  limits  to  the 
use  of  the  principle  in  teaching.  It  calls  attention  to  the  fact 
that,  in  memorizing,  repetition  is  an  essential  element.  If  ap- 
perception is  depended  upon  entirely  as  a  means  of  retention, 
and  the  principle  of  repetition  is  neglected,  the  results  are  by  no 
means  satisfactory.  The  criticism  on  this  point  of  the  pu- 
pil's lack  of  retention  of  a  certain  minimum  which  ought  to  be 
remembered,  was  often  aimed  wrongly  at  a  misconstrued  doc- 
trine of  interest  or  at  Herbartian  pedagogics  in  general.  It  is 
only  recently  that  it  has  been  directed  toward  the  real  diffi- 
culty, namely,  an  excessive  reliance  upon  apperception. 
Probably  the  research  into  the  problem  of  learning  and 
memory  by  experiments  in  psychology  and  pedagogy  has 
made  some  educators  conscious  of  a  healthy  and  reasonable 
limitation  of  appercepion  as  a  means  of  learning. 

At  this  point  may  be  made  some  comparisons  of  the  place 
of  apperception  in  American  Herbartianism  and  in  the  German. 
It  has  not  experienced  a  development  nor  been  given  a  dis- 
tinctive American  color  so  much  as  the  other  doctrines.  Dr. 
Harris  said,  "His  doctrine  of  apperception  does  not  need  cor- 
rection" (N.  E.  A.  1895  :  345).  The  one  American  contribu- 
tion may  be  said  to  be  the  consciousness  of  the  limiting  prin- 
ciple to  which  reference  has  already  been  made.  Judging 
from  the  amount  of  literature  distinctively  upon  apperception 
as  compared  with  other  topics,  that  subject  may  be  said  to 
have  been  given  a  more  prominent  place  than  in  German 
pedagogy.  It  is  also  treated  more  independently,  i.  e.,  less  as 
a  dependent  and  integral  part  of  the  whole  pedagogical  sys- 
tem. As  a  consequence  of  the  independent  consideration 
given  the  doctrine,  it  is  more  than  likely  that  it  is  often  con- 
sidered an  end  instead  of  a  means.  Consequently  it  plays  a 
smaller  part  as  a  selective  principle.     When  it  is  so  used,  it  is 


34       THE   DOCTRINES    OF   HERBART   IN   THE   UNITED   STATES 

most  often  disguised  as  a  mental  ability,  which  of  course  in- 
cludes apperceptive  power  and  natural  ability.  All  subject 
matter  should  be  within  the  comprehension  of  the  child.  In 
this  form  it  has  considerable  influence  also  as  a  selective  rule. 
Altho  not  used  to  the  extent  of  its  possibilities  in  this  latter 
respect,  and  altho  in  the  sphere  of  method  often  overworked 
and  sometimes  used  mechanically,  still  it  is  obvious  that  it  has 
had  a  stimulating  effect  on  American  teaching. 


THE   DOCTRINES    OF   HERBART   IN   THE    UNITED   STATES       35 

CHAPTER  V. 

THE  DOCTRINE  OF  INTEREST 

By  virtue  of  its  inherent  importance,  the  subject  of  in- 
terest gravitated  to  the  center  of  the  discussion,  becoming  the 
topic  of  the  earHest  controversies.  It  was  felt  to  be  the  kernel 
of  Herbartianism  (24  :  141). 

An  objection  was  made  by  the  philosophers  among  the  edu- 
cators, on  the  ground  that  interest  destroyed  the  will,  that  it 
was  a  makeshift  substitute  for  the  will.  It  was  in  partial 
answer  to  this  objection  that  a  similarity  between  love  and  in- 
terest was  pointed  out.  Love,  which  was  an  orthodox  end  of 
education,  was  made  a  stepping-stone  to  the  notion  of  interest. 
This  is  in  curious  parallelism  to  an  incident  in  Herbart's  own 
life,  for  he  himself  had  occasion  to  substitute  definitely  the 
word  "interest"  for  "love"  as  used  by  another  writer  (55  :  75). 

From  what  we  have  already  noted  about  interest  in  pre- 
Herbartian  pedagogy,  we  are  prepared  to  appreciate  the  fact 
that  there  was  considerable  confusion  in  the  use  of  the  newly 
introduced  concept.  There  were  some  mild-natured  people 
who  saw  an  ally  in  Herbart.  They  interpreted  him  of  course  to 
mean  "making  the  lessons  interesting."  This,  they  could  say, 
they  always  had  believed  in.  Such  disciples  naturally  would 
propagate  an  error  and  travesty  the  real  doctrine;  they  could 
not  help  bringing  it  into  ill  repute.  There  were  those  of  a 
severer  type  who  thought  Herbart  stood  for  just  that  idea,  and, 
in  dislike  of  a  flabby  doctrine  so  incompatible  with  that  of  dis- 
cipline, would  have  driven  it  out  without  giving  it  a  hearing. 
Dr.  White  in  scorn  called  Herbart's  theory  of  interest  a  "soup 
theory." 

In  the  same  paragraph,  he  voiced  a  second  objection  to 
the  theory,  namely,  that  it  was  indefinite.  Dr.  Galbreath 
showed  by  example  how  there  was  a  confusion.  He  said,  "In- 
terest is  to  guide  us  in  the  treatment  of  subjects,  and  we  are 
also  talking  of  the  interest  of  the  child  as  a  guide  to  him  in  his 
work"  (Fourth  Year  Book,  109).  There  was  certainly  a 
double  meaning  here  that  caused  a  great  amount  of  confusion. 
Even  Herbartians  were  baffled  by  the  confusion  which  reigned. 

The  Herbartians  had  their  work  cut  out  for  them  by  the 
nature  of  the  objections.  As  De  Garmo  later  said,  in  the 
sentence  already  quoted,  they  had  gone  by  faith  in  the  right- 
ness  of  the  cause.  Evidently,  an  analysis  of  the  whole  ques- 
tion of  interest  was  needed.  Much  of  the  early  controversy 
was  due  to  the  fact  that  the  true  meaning  of  the  doctrine  was 
neither  clearly  presented  nor  yet  completely  understood. 
What  interest  means  and  what  it  does  not  mean  had  to  be  so 
clearly  stated  that  all  misleading  preconceptions  would  be  re- 


36       THE   DOCTRINES    OF   HERBART   IN   THE    UNITED    STATES 

moved.  An  adequate  presentation  involved  an  interpretation 
in  terms  of  native  American  philosophical  and  psychological 
thought,  even  tho  it  apparently  should  give  a  new  meaning  to 
the  concept  of  interest.  The  first  adequate  analysis  was  given 
by  Dr.  Dewey.  He  analyzed  the  pedagogical  doctrine  of  in- 
terest and  showed  how  Herbart  was  substantially  correct. 
He  proved  most  conclusively  how  interest  in  the  Herbartian 
sense  had  nothing  to  do  with  the  pleasurable  as  such.  It  does 
not  even  mean  that  objects  of  knowledge  must  be  made  in- 
teresting. An  Herbartian  leader  writes  along  this  line:  "In- 
terest is  not  excited  simply  in  order  that  one  may  learn  better, 
i.  e.,  more  knowledge  be  acquired.  This  is  the  usual  view  but 
it  is  not  Herbartian"  (86  :  427).  It  is  false  to  associate  Her- 
bartian interest  with  any  gingerbread  theory  of  education. 
This  point,  that  pleasure  and  interest  can  not  be  identified,  was 
made  so  clear  that  there  ought  to  be  no  longer  any  question 
about  the  Herbartian  view.  No  more  can  there  be  fellowship, 
on  the  other  hand,  with  the  party  which  advocated  effort  for 
the  sake  of  discipline.  This  negative  description  of  interest 
brought  it  into  relief  and,  by  removing  some  preconceptions, 
opened  the  field  for  positive  statements. 

It  could  now  come  home  with  force  that  Herbart  had  in 
mind  to  arouse  and  build  interest  as  a  means  of  influencing 
conduct.  This  is  the  central  fact  of  Herbartian  interest.  The 
kind  of  character  one  has  is  dependent  upon  the  sort  of  in- 
terests resulting  from  his  education.  There  is  a  sternness  and 
seriousness  in  this  central  doctrine  of  Herbartianism,  which 
ought  to  silence  any  who  attempt  to  identify  interest  with  any 
trifling  pleasure.  However,  it  has  proved  an  extremely  hard 
matter  to  keep  the  true  notion  in  the  center  of  thought  and  dis- 
cussion. The  old  conflict  constantly  recurs,  distracting  at- 
tention from  the  main  thought. 

It  is  a  part  of  the  service  of  Dr.  Dewey  to  show  a  valid  re- 
lation between  interest  as  an  outcome  of  education  and  interest 
as  a  motive  in  learning  and  a  means  in  education,  a  question 
which  had  been  so  long  a  stumbling  block  in  America.  Its  so- 
lution came  thru  a  consideration  of  the  psychological  phases  of 
interest.  As  mentioned  in  a  preceding  chapter,  it  was  a  very 
common  thing  for  American  Herbartians  to  reject  the  Her- 
bartian psychology  and  philosophy.  Unlike  most'of  the  men 
who  discussed  Herbartian  topics,  Dr.  Dewey  was  a  psycholo- 
gist. He  also  felt  it  necessary  to  reject  entirely  the  psycholo- 
gy Herbart  had  created  and  to  make  a  new  psychological  basis. 
He  wrote,  "I  do  not  see  how  the  psychology  and  pedagogy  of 
interest  among  Herbartians  can  possiblv  be  made  to  square 
with  each  other"  (30  :  237). 

The  original  character  of  interest  must  be  sought  in  im- 
pulse, instincts,  and  feeling.     The  intellectual  basis,  so  promi- 


THE   DOCTRINES    OF    HERBART   IN   THE    UNITED    STATES       37 

nent  in  Herbart,  yields  to  one  in  which  impulse  or  will  is  the 
chief  characteristic.  Dr.  Dewey  pressed  his  belief  in  the 
fundamental  nature  of  impulsive  life  in  interest.  "All  con- 
duct springs  ultimately  and  radically  out  of  native  instincts 
and  impulses"  (28  :  27).  By  way  of  example  our  attention  is 
called  to  the  close  relation  between  instincts  and  conduct — 
how  we  have  certain  interests  because  we  have  certain  in- 
stincts. De  Garmo  has  worked  out  this  relationship  in  more 
detail,  discussing  the  range  from  the  most  primitive  instincts 
which  aid  in  self-preservation  to  the  instinctive  reactions  at 
the  basis  of  social  conduct. 

James's  attractive  view  of  the  selves  helped  to  prepare 
Americans  for  such  a  view  of  the  psychological  basis  of  in- 
terest as  Dewey  and  DeGarmo  presented.  In  the  process  of 
the  development  of  the  self — in  self-expression — interests  are 
present,  one  set  of  interests  giving  way  to  another  at  different 
stages  of  development.  Such  a  view  does  not  belittle  the  im- 
portance of  the  ideas  which  are  a  necessary  basis  for  the  in- 
terests, but  it  does  emphasize  the  wilHng  life  as  primary  and 
the  source  of  interests.  Now,  with  this  new  psychological 
basis,  the  way  is  opened  for  using  interest  not  only  as  a  motive 
but  also  as  an  end.  This  sense  has  to  be  always  carefully  dis- 
tinguished from  its  primary  and  original  Herbartian  meaning. 
It  is  possible  to  use  it  in  a  way  that  does  justice  to  the  popular 
view  and  does  not  do  violence  to  the  original.  It  is  a  neces- 
sary corollary  of  that  view.  Dewey  speaks  of  interests  in  this 
sense  as  signs  and  symptoms  of  dawning  capacities,  and  indices 
of  the  material  upon  which  the  child  may  work  most  fruitfully 
(31  :  16).  What  a  child  is  interested  in,  then,  is  suggestive  of 
what  ideas  may  be  most  easily  acquired.  Hence  they  form 
the  basis  of  permanent  interests.  Economical  teaching  de- 
mands that  subject  matter  be  chosen  which  will  most  probably 
be  interesting  at  the  same  time.  To  state  the  same  idea 
negatively,  as  is  commonly  done,  nothing  should  be  brought 
into  the  course  which  is  not  likely  to  be  interesting,  unless  de- 
manded by  the  consideration  of  the  aim  (88  :  197).  We  have 
here  one  use  of  interest  as  a  selective  principle  upon  which 
considerable  reliance  is  placed.  But  it  is  far  from  Herbartian- 
ism  to  say,  "Follow  all  interests":  it  says,  rather,  "Create  in- 
terests which  lead  to  the  ultimate  educational  aim."  Ameri- 
can Herbartianism  has  shown  how  and  when  it  is  possible  to 
use  native  interests  as  starting  points,  and  further,  that  where 
there  is  interest  the  operations  of  acquiring  are  relatively  easy. 

Credit  was  given  Dr.  Dewey  for  eliminating  the  psycho- 
logical objections,  and  his  monograph  was  warmly  received  by 
the  Herbartians.  His  psychological  analysis  was  accepted  in 
place  of  Herbart's,  since  he  had  expressed  for  the  Herbartians 
what  they  felt  and  believed  but  were  unable  to  reduce  to 


38       THE    DOCTRINES    OF    HERBART    IN    THE    UNITED    STATES 

words  SO  successfully  (24  :  143).  The  question  was  con- 
sidered settled,  and  for  a  long  time  the  public  discussion  of  in- 
terest was  less  general.  As  an  indication  of  this,  Professor 
Shaw  edited  in  1889  a  translation  of  Ostermann's  "Interest  in 
its  Relation  to  Pedagogy,"  with  the  purpose  of  reviving  the 
subject. 

It  is  hard  to  overestimate  the  importance  of  the  work  of 
Dewey  and  DeGarmo  in  the  development  of  a  doctrine  of  in- 
terest. Nevertheless,  there  were  some  drawbacks  to  their  ex- 
position. It  is  sometimes  rather  bewildering.  This  is  a 
criticism  brought  against  the  Dewey  monograph,  on  its  first 
reading.  If  it  created  a  new  basis,  it  did  not  insure  its  being 
understood.  The  discussion  cleared  up  some  errors,  but  it  is 
not  free  from  responsibility  for  some  minor  mistakes  in  theory 
and  practice.  In  carrying  on  a  sharp  fight  against  the  doc- 
trine of  effort  and  formal  drill  then  prevailing,  it  was  easy  to  go 
too  far.  Of  course,  effort  for  the  sake  of  discipline  can  never 
be  upheld ;  but  the  argument  ought  never  to  be  driven  so  far 
as  absolutely  to  banish  from  the  school  room  effort,  even  of  an 
unpleasant  nature.  Naturally,  if  left,  it  is  for  another  reason 
than  discipline.  Herbartians  demanded  that  interests  of  a 
right  sort  be  formed.  Action  and  interest  do  result  from 
ideas,  whether  they  are  in  themselves  interesting  or  not. 
When  it  is  desired  to  form  a  certain  interest  with  no  native  in- 
terests to  build  upon,  it  is  the  duty  of  the  strict  Herbartian  to 
marshall  the  ideas  necessary  for  such  an  end,  even  if  old  time 
effort  has  to  be  used.  Could  the  result  be  reached  by  the  path 
of  the  interesting,  then  so  much  the  better;  but  reached  it 
must  be.  Unfortunately,  many  lost  sight  of  the  central  fact 
of  the  theory  of  interest  and  thought  they  were  doing  Her- 
bartian service  if  only  all  effort  were  banished  from  the  school. 
The  Herbartians  were  blamed  for  the  false  position.  It  may 
often  require  memorizing  to  firmly  fix  ideas  that  are  to  insure 
a  permanent  interest.  The  memorized  material  may  be  vi- 
tally necessary  for  a  groundwork.  More  in  a  private  way 
than  thru  public  discussion,  Herbartians  are  seeing  the  mis- 
take of  over-forcing  the  fight  against  effort,  for  there  are  oc- 
casions when  it  is  the  only  way  to  reach  interest  in  the  primary 
sense.  It  is  a  question  of  insisting,  as  McMurry  does,  that  the 
nature  of  the  child  shall  not  control  in  the  selection  of  subject 
matter.  "The  nature  of  the  child  is  the  second  factor  in  in- 
fluence" (Second  Year  Book  of  the  Society  for  the  Scientific 
Study  of  Education  49) .  The  educational  aim.  is  of  first  import- 
ance. Such  a  position  is  not  only  good  Herbartianism,  but  a 
necessary  position  to  hold  at  a  time  when  experimental  peda- 
gogy is  coming  to  the  front,  a  pedagogy  which  has  to  do  very 
largely  with  questions  of  economy  of  learning  where  effort  is 
chiefly  relied  upon  to  get  results.     After  all,  it  is  not  an  easy 


THE   DOCTRINES    OF    HERBART   IN   THE    UNITED    STATES       39 

matter  to  hold  fast  the  idea  of  interest  in  both  the  primary  and 
the  secondary  sense.  It  is  so  easy  to  overemphasize  the  latter. 
Wherever  this  is  done,  there  is  an  unsettled  sort  of  teaching 
that  does  not  often  reach  any  definite  goal. 

The  Americans  have  not  kept  up  the  systematic  classifi- 
cations of  interests  which  Herbart  made,  but  in  a  measure, 
they  have  replaced  it  by  reference  to  particular  interests.  It  is 
in  harmony  with  American  thought  to  abandon  highly  worked- 
out  classifications,  since  they  savor  too  much  of  pedantry. 

During  the  discussions,  the  concept  of  interest  has  been 
illuminated  from  several  sides.  It  has  been  given  a  place  in 
the  general  scheme  of  development  as  worked  out  by  psy- 
chologists, and  has  been  enriched  thru  its  connection  with  the 
notion  of  self-expression  and  self -activity.  Whether  the  latter 
concept  is  familiar  to  American  teachers  thru  Froebel,  or  is  a 
reminder  of  Hegel  to  some,  among  them  Harris,  it  has  con- 
tributed to  the  complete  concept  of  interest  as  now  held.  The 
Herbartians'  profiting  from  Child  Study  has  given  interest  a 
definite  place  in  relation  to  the  instincts,  emotions,  and 
self -activities  and  to  their  stages  of  development.  After  in- 
terest has  been  considered  in  these  new  relationships,  it  ap- 
pears a  different  and  a  richer  concept.  The  original  orthodox 
meaning,  however,  is  still  at  the  center  and  can  not  be  held  too 
tenaciously.  If  interest  seems  of  a  different  color  now,  it  is 
because  of  its  immersion  in  American  psychology  and  philoso- 
phy. 


40       THE   DOCTRINES    OF    HERBART   IN   THE    UNITED    STATES 

CHAPTER  VL 

THE    DOCTRINE    OP    CORRELATION 

The  congested  and  crowded  nature  of  the  school  pro- 
grams had  been  a  matter  of  concern  to  practical  men  for  sever- 
al years.  Such  vigorous  complaints  had  been  expressed 
against  the  multiplicity  of  subjects,  that  any  principle  which 
promised  relief  by  concentrating  the  school  studies  and  by 
making  the  curriculum  less  unwieldy  was  sure  of  a  hearing. 
^n  the  Herbartian  doctrine  of  concentration,  some  saw  what 
they  thought  was  a  remedy  for  all  these  evils.  Others,  after 
thinking  over  the  Herbartian  solution,  devised  variations  of 
their  own,  which  they  held  with  the  same  pride  that  men  usu- 
ally attach  to  their  own  creations.  Some  favored  concentra- 
tion, others  correlation,  and  still  others  co-ordination.  Those 
who  favored  concentration  in  a  narrow  sense  selected  different 
subjects  for  the  core.  Likewise  among  those  who  favored 
correlation  or  co-ordination,  there  was  large  variation  in  the 
grouping.  To  add  to  the  confusion,  the  terms  were  often  used 
synonomously.  All  in  all,  it  is  probable  that  concentration 
received  more  attention  than  any  other  one  theory,  being  on 
the  crest  of  the  Herbartian  wave  immediately  following  that 
devoted  to  apperception.  It  was  widely  used  and  misused  in 
the  school  room,  and  was  a  common  topic  of  discussion  exerting 
wide  influence.  President  Butler,  in  writing  of  the  work  of 
the  Committee  of  Ten,  says,  "Neither  the  Committee  of  Ten 
nor  the  conferences  contained  a  single  person  who  may  be 
classed  as  a  follower  of  Herbartian  educational  theory  as  ex- 
emplified by  Ziller,  Stoy  and  Rein,  yet  by  purely  empirical 
methods  the  committee  and  the  conferences  arrived  at  a  strik- 
ing confirmation  of  the  main  doctrines  of  the  Herbartians — 
the  co-ordination  and  correlation  of  studies"  (9  :  77). 

The  interest  in  the  theory  became  so  great  that  in  1893 
the  Department  of  Superintendence  appointed  a  committee 
of  fifteen  on  elementary  studies,  one  of  whose  specific  problems 
was  the  correlation  of  studies.  In  making  its  report  in  1895,  it 
aroused  discussion  thruout  the  land.  At  the  first  meeting  of 
the  Herbart  Society  one  of  the  topics  discussed  was  concentra- 
tion. As  a  matter  of  fact,  it  monopolized  the  attention  of  the 
society. 

The  doctrine  had  a  marked  influence  on  school  work. 
The  Commissioner-General  of  the  United  States,  in  reviewing 
the  educational  exhibit  at  the  Paris  Exposition  of  1900,  found 
correlation  to  be  one  of  two  characteristics  of  the  American  ex- 
hibit, the  other  being  self-activity  on  the  part  of  pupils.  He 
observed  that  correlation  was  in  evidence  on  its  meritorious 
side  in  the  correction  of  formalism,  and  on  its  unfavorable  side 


THE   DOCTRINES    OF   HERBART   IN   THE    UNITED    STATES       41 

by  its  seeking  purely  artificial  relations  (U.  S.  Com.  of  Ed. 
Report  99-00,  1672).  One  excuse  for  the  artificial  phase  is 
that  most  of  the  teachers  had  only  the  theory  for  a  guide,  and 
then  often  only  as  expressed  in  extreme  form  without  oppor- 
tunities of  seeing  the  best  practice  in  the  use  of  the  principle. 

We  may  now  attempt  a  more  critical  survey  of  the  doc- 
trine, considering  the  objections  offered  to  it  and  the  changes 
it  underwent. 

An  illustration  of  the  misconceived  notions  of  concentra- 
tion— or  "correlation,"  which  is  the  term  most  frequently  used 
— may  serve  as  a  starting-point  for  the  discussion.  A  writer 
tells  of  a  visit  to  a  school  in  a  city  where  concentration  was  the 
rage.  "I  remember  hearing  of  a  day's  lesson  in  a  certain  over- 
correlated  city.  The  subject  was  "the  crow."  The  children 
studied  the  crow,  drew  him,  wrote  about  him,  added  and  sub- 
tracted him,  bought  and  sold  him,  multiplied  and  divided  him, 
and  for  aught  I  know,  carried  him  out  on  a  crow-bar"  (Educa- 
tion 17,  311).  Of  course  it  was  a  mere  travesty  of  Herbartian- 
ism,  but  many  believed  such  a  farce  was  Herbartianism  itself. 
Such  absurdities  were  represented  as  its  logical  outcome.  It  is 
obvious  to  anyone,  whether  he  knows  anything  about  the  doc- 
trine, that  the  principle  used  here  is  considered  an  end  and  not 
a  means. 

When  we  turn  back  to  the  Herbartian  sources,  it  is  per- 
fectly plain  that  the  doctrine  of  concentration  is  one  of  the 
means  for  the  realization  of  the  educational  aim.  No  small 
part  of  American  thought  and  practice  is  colored  by  treating 
the  doctrine  as  an  end  detached  from  the  system.  Neither  of 
the  two  systems  of  interpretation  which  were  recognized  as  the 
starting  point  of  American  thought,  lost  sight  of  its  being  a 
means.  One  School  of  interpreters  was  led  by  Stoy,  whose  no- 
tions were  more  fully  developed  by  Frick.  Of  the  two,  Frick 
exerted  the  more  influence  on  American  thought.  While 
groups  of  subjects,  such  as  the  linguistic  and  natural  science 
studies,  were  put  upon  a  completely  independent  basis,  and 
there  was  no  subordination,  still  the  course  of  study  was  made 
so  as  to  bring  out  every  possible  association  between  the 
studies.  History  and  literature  were,  moreover,  so  used  as  to 
exert  a  co-ordinating  effect  upon  the  other  studies.  A  rational 
-co-ordination  thru  far-reaching  interrelations  is  sought  in  the 
higher  stages  of  the  gymnasium  (80).  This  interpretation  of 
concentration  had  the  most  influence  in  the  higher  schools.. 

The  leaders  of  the  other  schools  were,  first,  Ziller  and 
later.  Rein.  They  represented  a  more  rigid  system  than  that 
of  Stoy  and  Frick.  Since  Herbartians  were  agreed  that  his- 
torical and  literary  studies  were  the  educative  material  of  first 
importance,  Ziller  and  Rein  chose  those  subjects  for  the  center 


42       THE    DOCTRINES    OF   HERBART   IN   THE    UNITED   STATES 

of  the  curriculum,  correlating  others  with  them.  For  exam- 
ple, the  place  of  the  sciences  was  not  determined  by  their  im- 
portance as  sciences,  but  thru  their  relation  to  the  central  sub- 
jects. A  place  was  given  the  sciences  because  they  were  re- 
lated to  man's  will  as  means  or  limits  of  its  activity.  In  prac- 
tice, geography  was  used  as  an  associative  study  between  na- 
ture subjects  and  the  historical-literary.  Formal  studies  like 
arithmetic  and  grammar,  were  considered  incidental  to  the 
main  elements  of  the  course.  We  are  most  concerned  with 
bringing  to  a  clear  light  the  fact  that  the  real  guide  in  the 
practice  of  concentration  is  the  growing  personality  of  the  pu- 
pil, for  it  deals  with  the  child's  manifold  interests.  The  true 
center  is  the  developing  character  of  the  pupil.  The  spirit  of 
concentration  lies  primarily  in  the  pupil,  and  only  secondarily 
in  the  subjects.  The  aim  of  education  must  always  be  kept  in 
mind.  The  concentration  of  the  branches  must  be  subordi- 
nate to  this  true  concentration.  Its  only  purpose  is  to  do  all 
that  is  possible  for  economy  of  effort  on  the  part,  first  of  the 
pupil,  and  then  of  the  teacher  (97  :  94) .  Rein  recognizes  with 
Herbart  that  a  plan  which  brings  all  to  one  point  is  harmful 
and  unnatural  (97  :  86).  He  admitted  that  Ziller  failed  be- 
cause much  of  the  connection  was  artificial  (97  :  83) .  In  the 
actual  practice  of  the  followers  of  the  Jena  school,  the  sciences 
are  not  destroyed,  but  are  preserved  in  groups. 

The  amount  of  space  given  to  this  exposition  is  justified 
by  the  fact  that  we  have  before  us  what  actually  influenced 
American  thought.  Some,  notably  De  Garmo,  came  under 
the  influence  of  Stoy  and  Frick.  The  Rein-Ziller  interpreta- 
tion, however,  exerted  the  most  influence,  and  is  what  most 
critics  had  in  mind  when  they  discussed  Herbartian  concentra- 
tion. Too  often  critics  took  Ziller  unfairly  by  the  letter  and 
neglected  the  development  of  the  doctrine  by  Rein. 

On  the  advent  of  Herbartianism,  studies  taught  in  iso- 
lation was  the  prevailing  practice.  Mr.  White,  who  had  done 
much  to  mould  pre-Herbartian  theory  and  practice,  advo- 
cated isolation  as  essential  and  fundamental  to  a  course.  It  is 
certain  that  many  feared  to  see  this  condition  pass  away. 
Any  plan  which  threatened  remotely  to  break  down  the  hard 
and  fast  divisions  between  studies  was  met  with  opposition 

Numerous  objections  were  made  against  concentration, 
among  them  that  it  destroyed  the  logical  order  upon  which 
teachers  had  worked,  set  up  a  higher  standard  for  teachers 
than  they  usually  possessed,  was  liable  to  degenerate  into  for- 
mal and  mechanical  correlation,  and  subordinated  all  studies 
to  one  central  study  (Summarized  83).  One  of  the  most 
vulnerable  points  of  attack  was  the  artificial  and  strained  use 
of  the  principle.  Only  a  few  had  the  opportunity  to  learn  how 
to  use  it  by  seeing  it  in  actual  practice  at  Jena  or  as  used  by 


THE   DOCTRINES   OF   HERBART   IN   THE    UNITED    STATES       43 

some  disciples.  The  teacher  had  only  the  theory  to  follow, 
and  that  detached  from  counter-influences  of  other  parts  of  the 
system.  It  was  not  Herbartian,  tho  many  represented  the 
practice  as  such.  Just  as  in  Europe  failure  of  some  had  made 
concentration  a  byword  in  the  mouths  of  many  (97  :  87),  so 
likewise  in  America  overdoing  it  had  brought  ridicule. 

However,  the  kernel  of  the  opposition  lay  in  fear  for  the 
fate  of  the  subjects.  Many  of  the  critics  devoted  more  atten- 
tion to  the  way  the  different  studies  and  sciences  developed 
than  to  the  development  of  the  pupil's  character.  They 
missed  absolutely  the  Herbartian  viewpoint. 

To  meet  the  arguments  of  the  critics,  the  Herbartians  em- 
phasized more  strongly  than  ever  that  school  sciences  as  such 
did  not  exist.  They  are  not  systematic  bodies  of  knowledge" 
(Second  Year  Book  33) .  Geography,  for  instance,  derives  its 
material  from  biology,  mathematics,  and  history  (Second 
Year  Book  29) .  Therefore,  on  the  basis  of  its  own  theory,  the 
isolated  treatm^ent  of  geography  finds  no  support.  Out  of 
this  phase  of  the  controversy,  there  developed  considerable 
literature  on  the  topic  of  the  logical  and  psychological.  This 
literature,  based  partially  upon  the  results  of  child  study,  em- 
phasized the  necessity  of  adapting  material  to  child  nature 
rather  than  to  the  logic  of  the  branches.  The  emphasis  on 
this  point  could  easily  lead  some  to  believe  that  Herbartians 
were  more  careless  about  the  school  studies  than  they  were  in 
actual  practice.  Herbartians  showed  by  convincing  examples 
that  a  mixing  and  mingling  of  studies  was  a  groundless  fear. 
Each  subject  of  study  would  preserve  its  boundaries.  It  was 
emphasized  that  artificial  and  far-fetched  correlations  were 
not  necessary  and  were  indeed  harmful.  While  Herbartians 
had  to  admit  a  danger  in  this  direction,  they  could  assert  that 
it  was  contrary  to  the  spirit  and  best  practice  of  Herbartian- 
ism.  Some  opponents  maintained  that  the  mental  powers  of 
the  pupil  would  guarantee  all  the  concentration  needed,  al- 
lowing the  curriculum  to  stand  as  it  was.  Thus  Mr.  White 
argued,  "It  did  not  follow  that  facts  taught  separately  re- 
mained isolated  in  the  pupil's  thought.  The  mind  is  endowed 
with  the  power  of  assimilation  and  unification"  (Second  Year 
Book  16).  Such  a  view  found  little  support  among  the  ene- 
mies of  the  doctrine. 

Some  opponents  of  the  theory  of  concentration  adopted  a 
theory  of  co-ordination  advocated  by  Dr.  Harris,  who  was 
chairman  of  the  subcommittee  which  wrote  the  report  on  cor- 
relation for  the  Committee  of  Fifteen.  It  is  entirely  his  work 
and  embodies  his  theory  of  education.  Practically,  it  is  only 
an  elaboration  of  the  report  of  a  committee  on  a  course  of  study 
made  in  1876.  Mention  has  already  been  made  of  the  group 
system  there  advocated.     If  the  word  meant  anything  in  this 


44       THE   DOCTRINES    OF    HERBART   IN   THE    UNITED    STATES 

connection  it  did  not  mean  correlation  of  studies,  but  a  sort  of 
philosophical  correlation  of  the  child  and  the  world  thru  his 
studies. 

The  Herbartians,  and  even  non-professing  Herbartians, 
who  were  alive  and  in  sympathy  with  the  current  of  thought, 
saw  that  it  was  not  concerned  with  the  true  problem  of  con- 
centration at  all.  Lukens  pointed  out  that  "The  report  stands 
for  isolation  and  arranging  the  studies  so  that  they  can  not 
possibly  interfere  with  one  another"  (78  :  27).  It  was  in- 
imical to  correlation.  Others  saw  quickly  enough  that  the 
report  was  not  even  on  the  subject,  but  dealt  rather  with  the  se- 
lection and  valuation  of  studies.  Col.  Parker  declared  that 
they  had  ignored  the  subject  which  it  was  intended  they  should 
treat.  When  he  moved  the  appointment  of  the  committee,  he 
had  expected  them  to  make  a  study  of  Herbart,  Ziller,  Stoy 
and  Rein  (N.  E.  A.  1895  :  344).  It  was  clearly  not  the  sort  of 
report  the  advocates  of  correlation  expected.  To  say 
the  least,  it  was  un-Herbartian,  for  it  gave  an  altogether  too 
prominent  place  to  formal  studies,  beside  neglecting  to  make 
proper  provision  for  interests  and  instincts.  The  report  was 
rightly  characterized  as  a  step  backwards  (N.  E.  A.  1895  :  348). 
A  golden  opportunity  was  indeed  lost.  Current  psychological 
investigations  threw  light  upon  the  problem.  A  committee 
in  sympathy  with  the  new  education  might  have  summarized 
and  given  expression  to  the  best  of  the  prevailing  thought,  and 
at  least  made  a  starting  place  for  new  investigations,  but  in- 
stead, a  report  was  offered  under  which  the  foes  of  the  new 
views  might  take  shelter.  It  was  a  severe  blow  to  the  normal 
development  of  the  doctrine  of  concentration.  Its  authority 
was  the  greater  because  of  Dr.  Harris'  commanding  influence 
and  because  of  the  form  in  which  the  report  appeared.  It 
went  broadcast  as  an  authoritative  statement  of  the  doctrine 
of  correlation. 

Centering  the  fire  upon  studies  and  their  interrelation, 
drew  the  Herbartians  from  their  position.  The  relation  of  the 
principle  of  concentration  to  the  realization  of  the  educational 
aim  was  not  kept  in  the  fore-front.  This  more  than  any  other 
one  factor  was  responsible  for  the  misunderstanding  of  the 
doctrine,  for  its  inadequate  exposition,  and  for  its  often  feeble 
execution.  Sometimes,  if  the  spirit  of  realizing  the  aim  is 
brought  to  consciousness,  the  whole  face  of  things  is  changed. 
It  is  true  that  a  dissenting  member  of  the  committee  defended 
concentration  against  the  implications  aimed  at  it.  In  an 
earlier  magazine  article  this  writer  had  said,  "Concentration  is 
primarily  for  the  sake  of  character  and  all  is  centered  in  the 
aim."  Unfortunately  in  the  report  the  dissenting  opinion  was 
weakened  by  the  fact  that  he  did  not  put  the  doctrine  in  this 
light;  hence  the  dissent  carried  little  weight. 


THE   DOCTRINES    OF    HERBART   IN    THE    UNITED    STATES       45 

The  Herbart  society  gave  concentration  a  dignified  place. 
At  the  first  meeting  the  seriousness  of  the  topic  was  appre- 
ciated. The  last  sentence  of  a  paper  on  concentration  voiced 
this  feeling  in  the  following  words:  "We  are  only  at  the  com- 
mencement of  the  investigation  of  this  important  subject ;  it  is 
one  of  the  life  problems  which  help  to  make  teaching  a  science 
and  a  profession"  (87  :  66). 

Among  the  friends  of  correlation  there  was  by  no  means 
entire  unanimity.  Col.  Parker  published  a  volume  on  the 
method  of  concentration  and  exemplified  it  in  the  Normal 
School  of  which  he  was  Principal.  He  acknowledged  the  in- 
spiration and  guidance  which  come  from  the  doctrine  of  con- 
centration as  enunciated  and  applied  by  Ziller,  Stoy,  and  Rein 
(91  :  V).  The  principle  of  unification  was  based  on  the  suppo- 
sition of  universal  law — thruout  all  phenomena  whether  of 
nature  or  man.  There  were  no  school  subjects  as  such.  The 
varied  manifestations  of  universal  law  constituted  the  cur- 
riculum. As  a  matter  of  fact  the  natural  sciences  were  made 
the  central  subjects  of  instruction,  in  the  belief  that  they  were 
most  educative,  being  the  most  complete  manifestations  of 
universal  law.  The  form  studies  spring  naturally  from  the 
thought  aroused  by  the  central  study.  The  course  was  open 
to  criticism  by  Herbartians,  because  there  was  not  enough 
emphasis  on  the  things  of  the  spirit  which  Herbartians  must 
consider  of  first  importance.  Col.  Parker's  views  commanded 
attention   and   exerted   influence. 

Professor  Dewey  made  progressive  industrial  activities  the 
center  of  the  curriculum  and  grouped  the  rest  of  the  school  life 
around  this  center:  the  Herbartians  desired  that  the  natural 
sciences  and  industrial  activities  exert  influence  over  the  will. 
Dewey  has  carried  the  socializing  of  the  sciences  and  industries 
farther  than  the  German  Herbartians. 

Dr.  DeGarmo  favored  a  group  system  of  studies  consisting  of 
three  groups,  historical,  natural  science,  and  economic.  The 
latter  may  be  considered  a  response  to  the  increasing  social  and 
economic  consciousness.  "Now  these  groups,"  he  tells  us, 
"are  the  cores  of  unification  with  constant  cross-relations" 
(19  :  243).  It  is  an  adaptation  and  extension  of  the  Stoy- 
Frick  interpretation,  hence  it  is  Herbartian  in  spirit  and 
ought  not  to  be  confused  with  the  co-ordination  theory  of 
Harris.  DeGarmo  also  accepted  from  the  Ziller-Rein  wing 
the  scheme  of  having  fairy  tales  and  Robinson  Crusoe  the  basis 
of  the  first  two  years,  a  practice  violently  rejected  by  Stoy. 
The  McMurrys  and  Van  Liew  have  kept  closest  to  the  Ziller- 
Rein  view.  They  do  not,  however,  accept  the  extreme  Ziller. 
proposition  (83  :  51).  They  take  practically  the  same  position 
as  Professor  Rein  in  giving  the  central  place  to  history  and 
literature.     When  this  is  said,  it  does  not  mean  that  all  other 


46      THE   DOCTRINES   OF   HERBART   IN   THE    UNITED   STATES 

subjects  lose  their  identity.  There  is  no  proposal  to  derive 
the  subject-matter  of  one  study  from  that  of  another. 

All  Herbartians  admit  that  a  large  responsibility  for  cor- 
relation must  rest  upon  the  teacher,  but  it  is  not  Herbartian  to 
rely  upon  that  alone.  Economy  of  effort  demands  also  a  cor- 
relation of  subjects. 

The  discussion  of  the  topic  fell  in  the  period  when  there 
was  a  great  deal  of  faith  in  the  deliverances  of  child  study. 
Many  looked  to  that  study  for  a  solution  of  the  problem  of  cor- 
relation. So  it  was  quite  a  common  thing  to  advocate  making 
the  child  the  center.  Let  the  school  activities,  then,  be  cor- 
related about  the  child's  instincts,  interests  and  life.  Her- 
bartians could  grant  the  validity  of  much  of  this  contention, 
but,  as  we  shall  see  under  the  topic  of  Culture  Epochs,  Her- 
bartians insist  upon  objective  standards  in  addition  to  the  sub- 
jective standards  which  child  study  provides.  The  theory  of 
making  the  child  the  center  breaks  down  in  the  presence. of  the 
question  fundamental  to  Herbartian  education,  namely,  what 
ought  a  child  to  become? 

Apperception  is  an  important  instrument  in  the  solution 
of  the  correlation  problem.  Its  use  in  this  connection  is  ob- 
vious. 

Correlation  is  still  a  problem,  tho  there  are  signs  of  fruitful 
progress,  particularly  in  this  fact  that  studies  are  made  for  the 
children.  Not  the  least  hopeful  sign  is  that  elementary  text- 
book writers  are  shaping  their  books  more  toward  the  psycholo- 
gy of  the  developing  child  and  less  with  the  idea  of  being  sci- 
entific. 

There  is  no  question  but  that  since  the  introduction  of  the 
doctrine,  teaching  is  far  different  from  what  prevailed  when 
isolation  was  theory  and  blind  practice.  One  prominent 
sign  of  such  a  change  is  the  way  form  studies  are  made  in- 
creasingly subordinate  to  content  studies.  In  practice,  iso- 
lation has  given  way  completely  to  some  form  or  other  of  cor- 
relation. 

Just  what  the  American  theory  of  correlation  is  would  be 
hard  to  say.  Negatively  the  view  is  partly  defined  by  the  use 
of  correlation  rather  than  concentration  or  co-ordination,  for 
the  theory  is  not  in  any  extreme  form  such  as  Ziller  is  com- 
monly represented  as  advocating.  Neither  does  co-ordination 
express  the  present  temper  of  the  American  mind.  It  were 
better  if  that  word  were  kept  for  the  view  of  Dr.  Harris. 
De  Garmo  also  uses  this  term  as  we  have  seen.  Correlation 
best  expresses  the  middle  course  which  is  the  one  taken.  The 
views  of  Dewey,  De  Garmo,  Parker,  and  McMurry  are  well 
known  among  educators,  and  there  is  no  question  but  that 
they  all  exert  an  influence  in  the  curricula  which  are  m.ade 
from  year  to  year.     In  fact,  they  have  doubtless  influenced 


THE   DOCTRINES    OP   HERBART   IN   THE    UNITED   STATES       47 

and  tempered  the  opinions  of  each  other.  The  activity  of  all 
is  in  the  direction  of  correlation.  The  American  view  is  just 
what  it  is,  because  of  the  contribution  of  each  individual. 
There  is  a  larger  place  given  to  industrial  activities  as  cor- 
relating agencies  than  would  have  been  true  if  it  had  not  been 
for  Dewey  and  his  followers,  while  the  McMurrys  have  kept 
the  correlating  power  of  the  historical  and  literary  subjects  in 
a  place  of  prominence,  and  an  impetus  for  science  and  nature 
study  as  correlating  studies  has  come  from  Parker.  It  is  to  be 
noted  that  credit  is  not  given  these  men  in  this  connection  for 
showing  the  worth  of  the  various  subjects,  but  for  showing 
their  correlating  value.  Child  study,  which  kept  before  the 
educators'  eyes  the  growing  personality  of  the  child,  has  pre- 
vented any  thinker  from  abstractly  following  a  chain  of 
thought  to  absurd  lengths.  DeGarmo  contributed  an  assured 
recognition  of  the  worth  of  all  the  content  studies. 

Of  the  original  German  schools,  the  representatives  of 
Ziller-Rein  exert  a  greater  influence  in  elementary  education 
than  the  Stoy-Frick,  with  a  leaning  toward  these  latter, 
Professor  De  Garmo  has  transferred  his  attention  more  and 
more  to  secondary  education.  In  it  some  group  system  is 
used  entirely.  It  suggests  that  perhaps  the  principle  of  cor- 
relation is  different  in  elementary  and  secondary  education. 
It  may  be  that  there  is  no  conflict  between  the  two  views,  that 
each  is  valid  in  its  own  field.  A  sort  of  philosophical  and 
rational  co-ordination  may  be  expected  with  older  pupils  in 
the  secondary  and  higher  schools,  but  not  with  the  younger  in 
the  elementary  schools.  The  logic  of  events  points  that  way 
in  Germany,  where  the  Stoy-Frick  interpretation  exerts  the 
most  influence  in  higher  education,  and  the  Ziller-Rein  in  ele- 
mentary. Professor  Rein  has  remarked  that  concentration 
growls  more  difficult  in  advancing  grades.  At  least  in  prac- 
tice, American  education  shows  a  tendency  to  the  view  that 
elementary  and  secondary  education  need  different  principles 
of  correlation.  The  solution  of  a  long-standing  conflict  seems 
to  lie  in  the  direction  indicated. 

On  the  one  hand,  it  may  be  said  that  the  doctrine  has 
suffered  loss  from  the  fact  that  it  had  not  a  place  in  so  com- 
pletely an  organized  system  as  that  of  Germany,  especially 
because  the  aim  has  so  often  been  lost  sight  of.  Of  course,  this 
is  the  least  tangible  part,  and  it  is  not  surprising  that  it  is 
hardest  to  hold.  On  the  other  hand,  there  has  been  a  rich  and 
varied  development.  In  neither  country  is  there  unanimity 
except  in  the  spirit  of  the  doctrine.  If  the  following  state- 
ment of  Parker  is  true,  it  is  not  surprising  that  unanimity  has 
not  been  reached.  He  wrote,  "The  doctrine  of  concentration 
is  itself  a  science  of  education  that  will  absorb  the  attention  of 
thoughtful  teachers  for  centuries"  (91  :  V). 


48       THE   DOCTRINES    OF   HERBART   IN   THE   UNITED   STATES 

CHAPTER  VII 

THE  DOCTRINE  OF  THE  CULTURE  EPOCHS 

To  the  problem  of  the  right  sequence  of  studies,  which  has 
confronted  every  constructive  educational  thinker,  the  Her- 
bartians  found  an  answer  in  the  theory  of  culture  epochs. 
Whether  this  theory  be  accepted  or  rejected,  the  educator 
necessarily  deals  with  the  substance  of  the  problem.  If  the 
development  of  the  child  is  by  periods,  it  follows  that  the  solu- 
tion of  the  best  educative  material  for  the  various  stages  of  de- 
velopment is  a  question  of  utmost  importance.  An  attempt 
to  keep  the  problem  chiefly  before  our  minds  and  to  trace  the 
influence  of  the  idea  may  carry  the  discussion  beyond  the 
limits  one  might  naturally  expect  to  mark  the  confines  of  the 
term  "culture  epochs."  The  other  ways  of  answering  the 
same  question  must  necessarily  be  considered,  for  they  in- 
fluenced the  attitude  of  thinkers  toward  this  Herbartian  doc- 
trine and  determined  to  what  extent  the  theory  might  be  ac- 
cepted. 

When  the  culture  epochs  theory  is  considered,  one  must 
remember  that  it  is  the  Ziller-Rein  interpretation  which 
Americans  have  in  mind,  an  interpretation  which  Stoy, 
Waitz,  and  some  other  Herbartians  bitterly  opposed,  but  the 
Ziller  conception  has  been  completely  identified  as  Her- 
bartian in  American  discussions.  It  is  worth  noting,  then, 
that  American  criticism  of  the  theory  has  its  counterpart  in 
Europe  even  among  Herbartians. 

The  chief  educational  characteristics  of  the  doctrine  as 
introduced  into  America  may  be  very  briefly  summarized  as 
follows:  there  are  well  marked  periods  in  the  civil  and  re- 
ligious history  of  the  nation  and  race.  Industrially,  too,  there 
are  marked  periods  which  fit  in  with  the  preceding.  O.  W. 
Beyer  contributed  to  Herbartian  pedagogy  the  notion  that 
education  must  attach  a  like  significance  to  the  industrial 
epochs,  hunting,  pastoral,  agriculture,  handicraft,  and  manu- 
facturing (97  :  45-48) .  Further,  a  study  of  children  reveals  a 
series  of  periods  in  which  there  are  characteristic  reactions 
which  show  they  are  living  on  a  more  or  less  similar  plane. 
At  this  point  the  claim  is  made  that  the  individual  passes  thru 
all  the  epochs  that  the  race  does,  from  savagery  to  civilization. 
The  ideal  course  of  study  consists  of  just  those  things  which 
aroused  an  abiding  interest  in  the  race  at  its  successive  stages 
of  advancement.  The  pupils  will  acquire  the  same  interests 
and  thus  rise  from  one  level  of  interests  to  another,  until  at 
length  the  interests  are  acquired  which  this  civilization  mani- 
fests. The  German  Herbartians  relied  chiefly  upon  the  liter- 
ary materials  which  represent  those  planes  and  upon  the  his- 


THE   DOCTRINES    OF   HERBART   IN   THE    UNITED    STATES       49 

tory  of  the  people  at  these  different  levels.  In  the  case  of  re- 
ligious interests,  Hebrew  history  and  literature  was  the  basis  of 
instruction,  except  in  the  last  year  in  which  Luther  and  the 
catechism  was  the  year's  work,  in  Rein's  course.  The  ma- 
terials for  the  profane  series — except  the  first  two  years  of 
school — where  in  the  first  year  fairy  stories  constituted  the 
course,  in  the  second  year  Robinson  Crusoe, — were  found  in 
the  life  of  the  German  people.  Robinson  and  the  fairy  stories 
were  thought  to  represent  the  most  childlike  period  of  the  race. 
In  a  word,  it  is  the  duty  of  the  educator  to  lead  the  "pupil  from 
the  beginnings  of  our  culture  to  an  understanding  of  the 
present"  (97  :48). 

The  theory  has  the  closest  relation  to  the  theory  of  apper- 
ception, for  the  pupil  is  to  live  in  each  period,  and  what  is  there 
acquired  will  then  form  the  apperceptive  basis  for  acquiring 
the  next.  The  present  can  not  be  reached  at  once,  because  the 
apperceptions  fail.  In  fact,  a  deductive  way  of  reasoning  from 
this  point  led  Herbart  and  Ziller  to  the  theory  of  culture 
epochs,  as  Vaihinger  has  pointed  out  (97  :  49) . 

The  American  critic  generally  has  in  mind  an  extreme 
form  of  the  Ziller  interpretation,  but  also  confuses  with  it  con- 
cepts which  might  more  properly  be  considered  under  the  head 
of  a  "theory  of  recapitulation."  One  critic  does  admit  that 
there  is  a  slight  distinction  betw^een  the  two  theories  (7  :  37) . 
It  is  probably  a  fact  that  the  American  view  of  culture  epochs 
has  been  modified  by  the  recapitulation  theory,  but  the  true 
status  of  the  culture  epochs  theory  can  be  understood  best  by 
keeping  the  prominent  points  of  view  of  the  two  theories  quite 
distinct  from  one  another.  Of  course,  both  agree  in  the  funda- 
mental notion  of  parallelism  between  race  and  individual  de- 
velopment. The  distinction  lies  chiefly  in  the  outlook  the  one 
or  the  other  affords.  The  recapitulation  theory  is  primarily 
biological,  and  emphasizes  chiefly  the  correspondence  in  the 
reactions  of  the  individual  with  the  reactions  of  animals  and 
men  at  the  different  stages  of  development.  It  rests,  then, 
first  on  the  science  of  biology,  especially  embryology.  The 
culture  epochs  theory,  as  the  word  culture  indicates,  draws  our 
attention  primarily  to  a  parallelism  between  the  stages  of  de- 
velopment in  the  race  and  in  the  individual.  To  repeat  the 
definition  given  in  the  first  pages  of  this  chapter,  the  child 
passes  fhru  the  same  stages  from  infancy  to  manhood  that  the 
race  passed  thru  from  savagery  to  civilization.  It  rests  on  so- 
ciology, authropology,  and  the  history  of  civiHzation.  Bi- 
ology can  furnish  it  with  arguments  only  by  analogy. 

The  topic  of  culture  epochs  did  not  at  first  meet  with  the 
serious  consideration  shown  some  other  Herbartian  principles. 
It  was  on  the  program  of  the  first  meeting  of  the  Herbart  So- 
ciety, but,  owing  to  the  fact  that  it  did  not  receive  the  attention 


50       THE   DOCTRINES   OF   HERBART   IN   THE    UNITED   STATES 

which  Herbartians  thought  its  importance  warranted,  papers 
were  again  prepared  on  this  topic  for  the  second  meeting. 

The  opponents  of  the  theory  in  the  early  periods  of  the 
discussion  made  their  attack  on  two  grounds :  first,  that  its  ad- 
vocates regarded  it  as  a  finahty,  and  second,  that  they  as- 
sumed that  there  were  no  Hmits  to  the  paralleHsm.  The 
Herbartians  assured  educators  that  they  held  neither  of  these 
views,  and  that  they  did  not  intend  to  carry  it  to  such  absurd 
lengths  as  the  opponents  represented  for  the  sake  of  holding 
the  theory  up  to  ridicule  (110  :  130). 

However,  the  objectors  continued  to  rely  upon  the  breaks 
in  the  chain  of  biological  development  which  could  only  show 
that  the  proof  was  imperfect.  They  were  fond  of  quoting 
Marshall  to  the  effect  that  entire  chapters  of  the  history  were 
lost,  that  some  pages  were  misplaced  and  others  blurred  so  as 
to  be  illegible,  and  that  still  others  were  but  spurious  addi- 
tions (7  :  38) .  The  premises  here  are  that  most  of  the  facts  in 
support  of  the  theory  are  derived  from  biology  and  embry- 
ology. Of  course,  the  Herbartian  notion  rested  primarily  up- 
on the  belief  in  an  orderly  development  of  society.  The  re- 
search of  biologists  can  do  little  more  than  furnish  a  back- 
ground for  the  Herbartian  culture  epochs  theory.  Such  ar- 
guments could  do  no  more  than  make  Herbartians  cautious 
about  asserting  too  much  for  their  theory. 

As  a  matter  of  fact,  caution  was  shown.  Van  Liew  and 
other  Americans  objected  to  drawing  lines  so  closely  as  did 
Ziller,  who  went  too  far  in  attempting  to  ascribe  these  stages 
even  approximately  to  definite  years  (109  :  95).  They  saw  in 
Rein  a  leader  who  allowed  larger  liberty.  They  agreed  that 
certainly  no  exact  parallelism  has  been  proved ;  but  practically 
all  felt  there  was  a  general  correspondence. 

Baldwin  has  called  attention  to  short  cuts  in  recapitula- 
tion. This  principle  naturally  emphasizes  in  a  new  way  a 
limitation  insisted  upon  by  Herbartians,  namely,  that  "mis- 
taken and  circuitous  routes  are  not  to  be  repeated  (97  :  52). 
Another  principle  of  practical  importance  in  tempering  the 
application  of  the  theory  is  arrest  of  development.  Dr. 
Harris  has  shown  how  excessive  exercise  in  any  one  stage  may 
cause  arrest  of  development  at  that  level. 

Some  other  factors  outside  of  Herbartianism  may  be  men- 
tioned as  contributing  to  the  theory  of  culture  epochs,  either  in 
confirmation  or  modification.  In  confirmation,  there  was  a 
growing  faith  in  the  essentially  evolutionary  nature  of  the  edu- 
cational process  that  education  is  attained  thru  a  series  of  ad- 
justments. There  was  a  continuation  of  thought  along  the 
line  which  we  may  say  Herbert  Spencer  opened  up.  The 
Clark  University  type  of  child  study  has  been  especially  clever 
in  its  interpretation  of  the  behavior  of  children  thru  an  appeal 


THE   DOCTRINES   OF   HERBART   IN   THE    UNITED    STATES       5 1 

to  race  parallelism,  either  established  or  fancied.  It  has  been 
more  in  the  nature  of  a  contribution  to  the  recapitulation 
phase  of  the  culture  epochs  theory,  and  has  emphasized  chiefly 
the  periods  of  individual  development. 

The  evolution  of  society  has  received  increasing  attention. 
The  growing  science  of  anthropology  has  thrown  much  light  up- 
on the  process  of  racial  development,  and  has  furnished  new 
data  for  the  continuation  of  the  inductive  study  of  the  stages  of 
development.  It  has  emphasized  the  fact  that,  at  certain 
points  in  the  historical  development,  there  are  certain  de- 
finite bodies  of  experience.  This  experience  is  the  resultant  of 
the  inventiveness  of  the  people  in  meeting  the  industrial,  social, 
religious,  and  aesthetic  conditions  which  surround  them.  A 
new  educational  interest  has  been  given  to  all  this  by  studies 
under  the  head  of  social  heredity  or  social  imitation,  by 
Tarde,  Baldwin,  and  others.  As  the  tendency  of  child  study 
was  in  the  direction  that  emphasizes  individual  development, 
so  this  last  sort  of  study  emphasizes  the  objective  products  of 
social  evolution.  The  terms  "social  inheritance"  and  ''imita- 
tion," used  by  these  writers,  imply  that  to  the  children  all  this 
inheritance  shall  belong.  It  is  for  them  to  acquire.  Butler 
has  presented  this  view  of  the  matter  in  the  address  on  "The 
Meaning  of  Education."  Dr.  Harris  most  emphatically  in- 
sisted upon  the  educational  importance  of  the  heritage  of 
civilization,  and  advocated  the  view  that  the  present  is  only 
properly  appreciated  in  the  light  of  the  past.  These  views,  in 
fact,  have  become  relatively  common  notions,  and  undoubted- 
ly fortify  the  culture  epochs  theory  at  certain  points,  especially 
in  emphasizing  the  educational  importance  of  the  products  of 
culture  which  child  study  alone  neglects.  At  one  point,  the 
Clark  school  helped  the  advocates  of  a  culture  epochs  theory 
against  those  who  would  teach  the  present  in  its  complexity, 
by  insisting  that  if  any  of  the  activities  peculiar  to  a  period  of 
development  were  neglected  in  hastening  on  to  the  exercise  of  a 
higher,  all  succeeding  stages  would  suffer.  So  Herbartians 
found  new  justifications  for  using  material  with  children, 
which  cannot  be  shown  to  have  a  practical  use  for  adults. 

With  influences  at  work  from  these  two,  namely,  from 
child  study  with  its  light  on  individual  development  and  from 
anthropology  and  sociology  with  somewhat  less  clear  light  on 
racial  development,  it  is  not  strange  that  there  was  uncer- 
tainty as  to  whether  the  sequence  was  in  the  child  or  in  the 
race.  Since  child  study  was  exerting  so  much  influence,  it  is 
not  surprising  that  there  was  a  marked  tendency  to  find  the 
standard  of  sequence  in  the  child,  C.  A.  McMurry,  in  1896, 
was  willing  to  accept  Dr.  Dewey's  statement  that  the  standard 
educationally  is  the  sequence  in  the  child  (85).  At  that  time, 
too,  there  was  a  marked  tendency  to  accept  the  Dewey  inter- 


52       THE   DOCTRINES   OF   HERBART   IN    THE    UNITED    STATES 

pretation,  that  activities  which  were  dominant  at  the  culture 
periods,  rather  than  the  ideas,  should  occupy  the  major  atten- 
tion of  the  child  (29) .  If  these  two  conceptions  were  followed 
without  regard  to  other  factors,  a  logical  conclusion  would  be 
to  educate  the  child  on  its  own  products,  to  let  it  write  its  own 
stories  and  make  its  own  culture  materials.  Of  course,  the 
impetus  from  orthodox  Herbartianism  and  some  other  factors 
already  mentioned,  was  too  great  to  permit  such  lengths  being 
reached  in  theory  or  practice.  Herbartians,  knowing  too  well 
from  actual  evidence  that  the  cultural  products  do  have  a  hold 
upon  children  and  result  in  the  very  activities  desired  by  Dr. 
Dewey,  were  not  ready  like  him  to  minimize  the  importance  of 
the  cultural  products.  The  ideas  are  more  suggestive  than  any 
blind  contact  with  nature  or  things  (85  :  105).  Sociological 
studies  grew  in  importance  and  the  Herbartians  turned  back  to 
a  more  conservative  position.  The  conviction  gained  ground 
that  the  psychical  development  of  the  child  can  furnish  no  final 
criterion  of  the  subject  to  be  taught.  Whether  the  selective 
principle  is  called  culture  epochs  or  social  tradition  the  Her- 
bartian  must  cling  tenaciously  to  the  essentialness  of  the  ac- 
quirements of  the  race.  In  1903  F.  M.  McMurry  wrote,  "The 
nature  of  the  child  shall  not  control  the  selection  of  subject 
matter.  The  nature  of  the  child  is  the  second  factor  in  in- 
fluence" (Second  Year  Book  for  the  Scientific  Study  of  Educa- 
tion :  47,  49) .  It  must  be  said,  tho,  that  the  activities  peculiar 
to  the  stages  which  Beyer  pointed  out,  are  given  a  larger  place 
than  in  German  Herbartianism.  A  great  deal  of  influence  has 
come  from  Dewey's  work  in  this  direction,  but  the  status  re- 
mains about  as  just  given. 

Some  have  refused  all  allegiance  to  the  theory  because  it 
can  not  be  demonstrated,  but  others  act  as  tho  they  would  say, 
"Granted  it  is  not  a  demonstrable  fact,  it  is  nevertheless  a 
workable  theory."  As  a  matter  of  fact,  it  disputes  honor  with 
the  doctrine  of  interest  and  apperception  for  influence  in  the 
practical  changes  which  have  come  over  our  course  of  study. 
C.  A.  McMurry  was  the  first  to  make  application  to  courses. 
The  Americans  had  before  them  the  research  of  Professor  Rein, 
but  common  sense  changes  were  made  to  fit  American  condi- 
tions. 

If  one  would  measure  its  influence,  he  has  only  to  compare 
the  studies  in  the  first  two  or  three  grades  after  the  advent  of 
Herbartianism  with  what  pupils  of  the  same  age  studied  in  the 
preceding  period.  Stories,  fairy  tales,  Robinson  Crusoe,  or  a 
poem  like  Hiawatha  took  the  place  of  much  of  the  reading  and 
spelling  lessons  of  the  old  school.  It  was  a  happy  thought,  de- 
veloped especially  by  C.  A.  McMurry,  to  continue  with  pioneer 
stories  of  the  child's  own  community,  followed  by  colonial 
history,  finishing  with  our  national  history  in  the  last  year. 


THE    DOCTRINES    OF    HERBART    IN   THE    UNITED    STATES       53 

In  this  analysis  of  the  culture  epochs  in  our  history,  he  showed 
how  Americans  could  be  original  in  application  and  be  true  to 
the  spirit.  One  of  the  opponents  of  the  theory  admitted  that 
the  practices  were  good,  altho  the  reasons  for  them  were  bad. 
Many  granted  the  changes  were  good  from  an  educational 
standpoint.  It  seems  to  be  the  spirit  of  American  Herbartian- 
ism  to  put  the  chief  reliance  for  a  proof  of  the  theories  upon  the 
way  they  work  in  practice. 

The  theory  of  culture  epochs  probably  finds  less  formal  ac- 
ceptance than  any  other  Herbartian  doctrine.  It  is  seldom 
spoken  of  under  that  name,  and  yet  there  is  a  belief  in  some- 
thing of  real  influence  in  our  educational  theory  and  practice, 
which  is  the  American  counterpart  of  the  German  theory  of 
culture  epochs.  Perhaps  a  more  indefinite  phrase  like  "theory 
of  parallelism"  fits  the  temper  better.  It  has  been  the  object 
to  summarize  the  substance  of  such  a  doctrine  and  show  what 
it  is  as  a  resultant  of  several  forces.  It  can  not  be  narrowly 
defined.  Its  vagueness  of  statement  is  one  of  the  ways  in 
which  it  differs  from  the  German  form  of  the  theory.  It  is  a 
synthesis  which  does  justice  to  the  historic  and  generic  spirit, 
on  the  one  hand,  as  exemplified  by  Harris,  and  the  spirit  of  in- 
dividualism and  election  of  studies  (interest),  as  exemplified 
by  Eliot,  on  the  other  hand.  We  may  put  this  same  synthesis 
in  another  form  and  say  that  justice  is  done  those  who  maintain 
that  the  choice  of  studies  is  determined  by  the  demands  of  the 
civilization  into  which  the  child  is  born,  and  those  who  be- 
lieve with  President  Hall  and  other  child  psychologists  who  say 
the  curriculum  can  only  be  settled  by  a  study  of  childhood  and 
youth  (78  :  29).  It  takes  a  judicial  position  toward  the  re- 
searches of  child  study,  the  new  interpretations  of  primitive  so- 
ciety and  institutional  history,  and  the  teachings  brought  from 
Germany. 

None  maintain  that  the  theory  of  parallelism  has  the  final 
word  on  the  question  of  sequence  of  studies.  It  carries  far  less 
authority  than  the  theory  of  culture  epochs  does  in  the  Ziller- 
Rein  school,  altho  rich  in  suggestiveness.  It  is  serviceable  to 
other  principles  to  which  Americans  attach  more  authority. 
It  is  suggestive,  for  example,  in  showing  what  will  most  likely 
be  interesting,  what  interests  can  most  easily  be  acquired,  and 
which  of  them  ought  to  be  acquired.  It  is  suggestive  of  ma- 
terial suitable  to  the  mental  ability  and  apperceptive  powers  of 
children  at  varying  ages,  and  prevents  the  use  of  these  prin- 
ciples in  an  absolute  way.  It  guides  the  products  and  ac- 
tivities of  lower  levels  and  assures  a  consideration  of  them  in 
the  course  of  study.  E.  E.  Brown  expressed  a  notion  similar 
to  this  by  saying  it  gave  dignity  to  the  earlier  periods  of  in- 
struction (8  :  81).  This  is  by  no  means  a  negligible  factor, 
when  we  appreciate  the  influence  among  us  of  such  ideas  as 


54       THE   DOCTRINES   OF   HERBART   IN   THE    UNITED    STATES 

social  heredity  and  spiritual  inheritance.  It  is  nothing 
against  the  principle  in  hand,  that  it  takes  a  relatively  subor- 
dinate place.  Probably  the  greatest  reason  that  the  doctrine 
of  culture  epochs  has  fallen  into  discredit  is  that  its  opponents 
represented  it  as  purporting  to  be  a  final  selective  principle. 
This  was  aggravated  by  the  fact  that  Herbartians  themselves 
lost  sight  of  its  being  a  means  and  not  an  end.  It  is  too  com- 
mon to  discuss  the  question  without  enough  reference  to  the 
aim  of  instruction.  It  is  in  harmony  with  the  spirit  of  Her- 
bartianism  that  the  aim  alone  is  an  end,  and  that  the  principle 
of  parallelism  is  a  means. 


THE   DOCTRINES    OF    HERBART    IN   THE    UNITED    STATES       5$ 

CHAPTER  VIII 

THE  DOCTRINE  OF  THE  FORMAL  STEPS 

Logically,  in  the  Herbartian  system,  the  treatment  of 
method  follows  the  other  topics,  but  in  America  the  doctrine 
of  formal  steps  was  the  first  to  have  systematic  treatment. 
The  American  teacher  was  best  prepared  for  instruction  in 
method,  since  it  had  been  for  a  generation  and  more  the  chief 
subject  in  his  pedagogy.  The  educational  journals  were  de- 
voted, for  the  most  part,  to  the  presentation  and  discussion  of 
methods  and  devices. 

DeGarmoinhis  "Essentials  of  Method,"  1889,  was  the  first 
to  present  to  American  readers  the  doctrine  of  the  formal 
steps  of  the  recitation  as  developed  by  German  Herbartians. 
It  was  at  the  same  time  the  first  work  of  any  extent  bearing  on 
Herbartian  pedagogics,  written  by  an  American.  DeGarmo 
drew  from  the  German  sources.  Professor  Rein  and  Dr.  O. 
Frick.  In  general  five  formal  steps  were  recognized:  prepar- 
ation, presentation,  association,  condensation,  and  application, 
as  given  by  Professor  Rein.  The  first  two  are  steps  in  the  one 
stage  of  gaining  facts;  the  next  two  are  likewise  steps  in  the 
formulation  and  statement  of  the  general  notion.  So  the  most 
essential  feature  of  Herbartianism  is  the  recognition  of  three 
stages  as  being  necessary  to  correct  method.  De  Garmo  recog- 
nizes and  calls  them  by  various  names.  On  the  title  page  of 
the  book,  these  three  words  are  found :  observation,  generaliz- 
ation, application.  Later  he  defines  them  more  closely  as, 
first,  the  apperception  of  new  facts;  second,  transition  from  in- 
dividual to  general  notions ;  third,  the  application  of  these  gen- 
eral truths  to  concrete  facts.  Under  the  first  head  are  in- 
cluded preparation  of  the  child's  mind  and  presentation  of 
matter  of  instruction. 

The  process  of  mind  in  the  second  stage  is  called  induc- 
tion, and  includes  comparison  of  the  data  which  have  been  se- 
cured by  apperception  and  the  formulation  of  the  general 
truth,  followed  by  the  application  of  the  general  truths.  It  is 
seen  how  closely  the  analysis  of  the  Germans  is  followed. 

The  German  Herbartians  recognized  two  forms  of  presen-. 
tation,  that  of  mere  telling  by  the  teacher,  and  that  of  helping 
the  child  to  discover  and  anticipate  the  details.  In  the  latter 
case  facts  and  general  truths  are  developed  by  conversation ; 
hence  it  is  called  the  unfolding  or  developing  presentation. 
This  method  is  far  better  adapted  to  call  out  the  self-activity 
of  the  pupil.  The  text  of  "The  Essentials  of  Method"  only 
hinted  at  this  form  of  presentation  (15  :  96),  but  the  practical 
illustrations  of  lessons  afforded  good  examples  of  its  use. 
Besides,  in  treating  the  second  stage  under  the  name  of  indue- 


56      THE    DOCTRINES    OF   HERBART   IN   THE    UNITED   STATES 

tion,  the  second  method  is  brought  into  the  foreground.  Al- 
tho  these  forms  are  spoken  of  chiefly  in  connection  with  the 
step  of  presentation,  still  the  spirit  of  one  or  the  other  will  per- 
vade all  the  first  four  steps. 

The  use  of  the  word  induction  is  suggestive  of  a  point  at 
which  the  Herbartian  doctrine  found  support  in  current 
English  and  American  thought.  The  triumphs  of  modern 
science  and  the  inductive  method  which  it  used  had  become 
familiar  to  many  teachers  and  to  a  large  percentage  of  the 
people.  Herbert  Spencer  had  eloquently  championed  the 
notion  that  children  should  learn  by  making  their  own  in- 
vestigations and  by  drawing  their  own  inferences. 

It  was  the  part  of  wisdom  for  Herbartians  to  ally  them- 
selves with  current  thought  which  might  be  helpful  to  the  intro- 
duction and  spread  of  the  doctrine  of  formal  steps.  "Is  it  sci- 
entific?" is  the  measuring  stick  applied  to  all  new  notions  in 
this  generation,  replacing  this  question,  "Is  it  logical?"  of 
former  generations.  The  friends  of  the  formal  steps  asserted 
the  agreement  with  scientific  procedure,  pointing  out  the 
parallelism  between  the  steps  in  scientific  procedure  as  for- 
mulated by  Huxley  and  the  formal  steps  in  learning  (81  :  289). 

When  the  McMurrys  published  the  "Method  of  the  Recita- 
tion," they  formally  combined  the  two  forces,  in  that  the  book 
was  based  upon  the  principles  of  teaching  expounded  by 
Herbart,  Ziller,  and  Rein  (81  Int.  VIII)  and  also  upon  the 
"inductive-deductive  thought  movement  in  acquiring  and  us- 
ing knowledge"  (81  :  Int.  VII).  The  spirit  of  the  inductive 
method  received  a  larger  place  in  this  book  than  in  the  "Es- 
sentials of  Method." 

The  induction  of  science  can  well  be  considered  an  im- 
portant factor  in  the  acceptance  and  development  of  the  doc- 
trine of  formal  steps  in  America,  and  is  in  a  measure  respons- 
ible for  the  fact  that  the  developmental  method  receives  ade- 
quate treatment. 

Thus,  the  formal  steps  became  very  popular  with  a  great 
number  of  teachers,  who  found  the  method  quite  usable,  altho 
they  might  know  nothing  of  other  Herbartian  doctrines.  Of 
course,  it  followed  naturally  that  some  teachers,  untrained  in 
the  use  of  the  formal  steps,  would  overdo  and  bring  discredit 
upon  this  as  upon  any  other  doctrine.  It  was  in  the  develop- 
mental phase  of  instruction,  under  the  name  of  the  inductive 
method,  where  the  rage  for  a  time  was  greatest  and  where  dis- 
crediting practice  was  most  common.  Inductive  text -books 
were  written  in  large  numbers.  Induction  was  a  word  to 
charm  with.  Teachers  failed  more  often  than  they  succeeded 
with  it,  because  it  was  a  tool  in  the  use  of  which  they  had  no 
special  training.  In  many  schools  teachers  could  be  found 
wasting  valuable  time  in  pursuing  a  senseless  guessing  game  or 


THE   DOCTRINES   OF   HERBART   IN   THE    UNITED    STATES       57 

beating  around  the  bush  trying  to  get  the  pupil  to  discover  a 
fact  or  idea. 

How  much  of  the  rage  for  the  inductive  method  was  due 
to  the  Herbartians,  and  how  much  to  the  natural  scientists  and 
especially  Herbert  Spencer,  is  difficult  to  say.  It  is  probable 
that  the  momentum  came  from  the  latter,  and  that  the  former 
crystallized  into  definite  and  practical  form  the  vague  general- 
izations on  method  by  the  scientists.  The  two  forces  worked 
together,  but  the  scientists,  rather  than  the  Herbartians,  had  to 
bear  the  criticisms  for  the  failures.  Certainly  much  of  the 
failure  was  due  to  the  partial  grasp  of  the  problem.  They 
knew  how  to  reach  general  conclusions,  but  they  left  them 
swaying  in  the  air,  for  the  fifth  step  was  not  enough  in  evidence. 
Herbartians  emphasized  more  and  more  that  teachers  should 
be  cautious  in  the  use  of  the  developmental  method,  since  not 
every  teacher  is  fitted  to  use  it  successfully.  Further, 
there  are  limitations  in  its  use  because  it  is  not  everything  that 
can  be  developed. 

The  Herbartians  had  to  defend  the  formal  steps  from  va- 
rious criticisms.  The  earlier  ones  were  directed  against  the 
supposed  effects  of  the  use  of  the  method  upon  the  teacher  and 
pupil,  in  making  the  teacher  a  dry  formalist  and  taking  away 
the  pupils'  power  of  self-activity.  The  later  criticisms  have 
been  directed  toward  the  question  of  the  truth  and  universal 
validity  of  the  theory.  It  was  urged  by  some  that  the  doc- 
trine of  formal  steps  would  have  a  mechanizing  effect  upon  in- 
struction. There  is  no  question  but  that  there  were  individual 
teachers  against  whom  such  a  charge  might  be  brought;  but 
the  charge  is  without  ground  when  brought  against  the  doc- 
trine as  developed  in  America.  The  receptivity  of  Herbar- 
tians to  the  discoveries  in  child-study  was  an  assurance  that 
there  would  be  no  dead  mechanical  use  of  the  formal  steps. 
From  the  outset,  the  American  Herbartians  recognized  the 
need  of  using  the  formal  steps  subject  to  the  powers,  limita- 
tions, and  interests  of  the  child  at  its  varying  stages  of  de- 
velopment (15   :  76). 

The  assertion  that  the  formal  steps  are  universal  processes 
met  with  objections  from  several  quarters.  The  feeling  that 
the  doctrine  was  not  completely  adequate  may  be  considered 
partially  a  consequence  of  the  new  psychological  basis  Ameri- 
can Herbartians  have  accepted.  If  the  positions  with  refer- 
ence to  such  questions  as  the  emotions  and  will  are  different,  it 
would  be  natural  to  look  for  a  correspondingly  new  method ;  or, 
at  least,  one  ought  not  to  be  surprised  if  faith  in  the  old  method 
is  somewhat  shaken.  There  has  been  a  feeling  that  the  formal 
steps  apply  very  well,  so  long  as  it  is  a  question  of  acquiring 
knowledge;  but  that,  in  subjects  where  skill  or  an  emotional 
response  is  aimed  at,  they  are  not  in  place  (111  :  193).     The 


58       THE   DOCTRINES   OF   HERBART   IN   THE   UNITED    STATES 

English  Herbartian,  Findley,  gives  expression  to  such  views 
(41  :  335).  Some  of  the  factors  which  hinder  modifications  in 
the  direction  of  Findley' s  suggestions  may  be  mentioned.  The 
most  economical  method  in  acquiring  skill  is  a  question  for  ex- 
perimental pedagogy.  At  present,  an  experimental  attack  has 
only  commenced.  Herbartians  can  join  in  the  experimental 
investigations  with  as  good  a  spirit  as  other  educators,  and  it  is 
quite  certain  American  Herbartians  will  welcome  the  results  of 
all  such  researches  in  special  method. 

As  to  the  suggestion  that  the  method  does  not  apply  in 
the  case  of  the  emotions,  it  is  to  be  said  that  the  same  psy- 
chology which  is  responsible  for  the  change  in  view  as  to  the 
origin  of  the  emotions  has  also  spread  the  belief  that  to  arouse 
the  emotions  without  their  discharge  in  action  is  pernicious. 
Giving  the  right  direction  to  the  activity  is  a  matter  of  judg- 
ment and  intellect.  If  we  do  not  produce  the  unstable  charac- 
ter of  which  we  are  warned,  the  intellectual  must  have  the 
leading  place:  hence  the  methods  appropriate  to  the  ac- 
quisition of  truth  must  be  given  the  place  of  first  importance. 
As  in  so  many  cases,  the  new  psychology  bolsters  up  the  Her- 
bartian practice. 

In  this  connection  we  may  note  an  impress  the  new  psy- 
chology has  left  upon  method.  There  is  a  growing  conviction 
that  the  application,  the  fifth  step,  should  come  in  some  ob- 
vious form  of  activity  and  doing,  which  activity  shall  serve 
as  the  starting  point  of  another  thought  movement.  The 
action  has  confronted  the  child  with  a  new  and  unsolved  prob- 
lem, and  his  realization  of  this  problem  leads  into  a  new  lesson 
in  which  the  solution  is  sought.  Professor  De  Garmo  makes 
this  annotation  in  the  translation  of  Herbart's  "Outlines  of 
Doctrine:"  "The  fact  that  doing  is  antecedent  to  our  interest  in 
knowledge  or  feeling,  is  fully  recognized  by  all  Herbartians  in 
the  theory  of  method"  (59  :  77).  This  is  an  advanced  posi- 
tion, and  the  facts  in  educational  literature  and  practice  do  not 
indicate  that  it  has  been  widely  grasped  in  its  largest  signifi- 
cance. Perhaps  the  largest  force  in  favor  of  the  old  interpreta- 
tion has  been  the  widespread  use  and  influence  of  the  McMurry 
texts  on  special  method.  In  them  the  view  is  consist antly 
maintained  that  the  formal  steps  are  universal  in  their  appli- 
cation, because  they  are  capable  of  great  variety  in  adjust- 
ment to  the  needs  of  different  studies.  On  this  question  of 
universality,  about  all  one  can  say  is  that  it  is  in  an  unsettled 
state. 

Beside  the  definite  criticisms  already  mentioned,  there 
have  been  objections  of  a  general  nature  directed  against  the 
method.  It  is  quite  common  to  find  statements  that  American 
teaching  owes  much  to  the  formal  steps,  but  that  they  are  in 
need  of  revision.     As  a  rule,  one  looks  in  vain  for  a  definite  sug- 


THE   DOCTRINES    OF   HERBART   IN   THE    UNITED    STATES       59 

gestion,  as  to  how  they  should  be  revised.  However,  these 
critics  have  not  been  without  influence  in  dampening  the  ardor 
of  Herbartian  enthusiasts  and  putting  the  whole  doctrine  in  an 
unfavorable  light.  In  general,  the  introduction  of  the  new 
thought  gave  a  healthy  tone  to  method  and  led  away  from 
catchy  devices.  At  the  same  time,  nothing  is  put  in  the  way  of 
investigation  and  experimentation  looking  forward  to  the  most 
economical  way  of  presentation  and  generalization. 

In  summarizing,  we  may  note  that  child  study  and  scientific 
education  were  factors  in  the  development  of  the  doctrine  of 
formal  steps  in  America,  and  that,  as  a  consequence,  some 
limitations  and  qualifications  of  the  steps  have  been  accepted. 
The  best  writers  accept  the  doctrine  of  the  inductive  de- 
velopment method  of  Herbart  with  those  relatively  few 
qualifications  and  with  precautions  as  to  its  use.  The  opinion 
of  Professor  Smith  may  be  quoted  in  conclusion:  "The  influ- 
ence of  such  writers  as  DeGarmo  and  the  McMurrys  in  America, 
opening  up  the  German,  and  particularly  the  Herbartian, 
views  of  the  bases  of  method  or  the  basis  of  education,  has 
given  a  great  impetus  to  teaching  in  America." 


6o      THE   DOCTRINES    OF   HERBART   IN   THE   UNITED   STATES 

CHAPTER  IX 

CONCLUSION 

In  19C1  the  Herbart  Society  dropped  the  word  Herbart  from 
its  name  and  has  since  been  known  as  "The  National  Society 
for  the  Scientific  Study  of  Education."  It  is  a  suggestive 
point  of  departure  for  drawing  a  conclusion  as  to  Herbartian- 
ism  in  America.  In  no  wise  does  the  change  of  name  mean 
that  Herbart  has  been  abandoned,  but  rather  it  may  be 
thought  of  as  the  last  of  the  suggestive  parallels  between 
Herbart  in  Germany  and  Herbart  in  America.  Just  as 
German  Herbartians  talk  of  scientific  pedagogy,  so  Americans 
even  tho  they  be  Herbartians,  prefer  the  advantages  which 
come  from  research  under  the  name  of  scientific  education. 
It  does  not  hinder  one  from  believing  that  Herbart  has  been 
the  largest  contributor  to  that  science.  The  publications  of 
the  society  indicate  no  attempt  at  any  new  grounding  of  the 
science.  This  fact  is  really  a  tacit  admission  that  the  peda- 
gogy worked  out  on  Herbartian  lines  is  the  best  expression  of 
the  fundamental  principles  of  a  science  of  education.  If  the 
followers  in  Germany  are  right  in  using  the  name  "scientific 
pedagogy,"  the  corollary  inevitably  follows  that  the  peda- 
gogy will  unfold  with  the  progress  of  scientific  discovery. 
Americans  have,  then,  such  a  precedent. 

A  glimpse  has  been  taken  at  the  state  of  pedagogy  in  the 
eighties.  The  several  chapters  following  have  been  taken  up 
with  describing  the  changes  that  came  over  American  peda- 
gogy as  a  result  of  the  discussion  of  the  different  Herbartian 
principles.  It  is  not  necessary  to  call  further  attention  to  the 
details  of  the  complete  transformation  which  resulted  in  edu- 
cational thought.  That  has  been  done  in  connection  with  the 
various  doctrines. 

However,  if  one  were  to  look  for  a  statement  of  American 
Herbartian  pedagogy  in  a  systematic  form,  his  search  would 
be  in  vain.  There  is  a  sense  in  which  there  are  as  many 
pedagogies  as  there  are  thinkers.  The  variation  comes  from 
the  fact  that  pedagogy  shares  in  the  nature  of  philosophy  as 
well  as  of  science.  If  we  could  get  a  good  view  of  one  of  these 
American  minds,  we  would  come  upon  a  characteristic  which 
differentiates  an  American  educational  thinker  from  the 
German.  Everyone  must  be  impressed  with  the  relatively 
chaotic  and  unsystematic  presentation  of  American  writers. 
The  fact  that  they  do  not  trouble  themselves  about  the  articu- 
lations of  the  various  parts,  by  no  means  indicates  that  their 
minds  are  equally  unsystematic :  they  possess  the  pedagogy  in 
its  spirit,  altho  the  power  of  accurately  expressing  their 
thoughts  and  impressions  seems  to  a  degree  to  be  lacking. 


THE   DOCTRINES   OF   DERBART   IN   THE   UNITED   STATES       6l 

This  appears  to  be  an  Anglo-Saxon  characteristic.  Just  as  the 
English  constitution  on  the  surface  is  apparently  contradictory 
and  has  a  bewildering  mass  of  checks  and  counter  checks, 
while  yet  the  spirit  of  it  is  followed  generation  after  gener- 
ation, so  in  the  matter  of  pedagogy  the  American  is  not  satis- 
fied with  saying  he  believes  in  a  certain  statement  of  principle, 
going  on  then  to  articulate  with  it  a  closely  related  principle, 
and  so  on  until  he  has  a  systematic  pedagogy.  The  truth  is  he 
believes  always  with  qualifications,  but  a  systematic  peda- 
gogy can  not  be  made  of  qualifications.  It  must  accept  defi- 
nitions once  and  for  all.  To  the  American  the  definition  does 
not  contain  all  the  truth,  and  it  contains  a  little  which  is  not 
truth.  All  this  is  said  in  spite  of  the  fact  that  nowhere,  cer- 
tainly not  in  Germany,  have  Herbartian  principles  been  car- 
ried to  such  absurd  lengths  as  in  America.  Perhaps  just  be- 
cause of  the  absurdities  in  practice,  the  thinkers  who  try  to  see 
all  sides  are  timid.  Certainly,  no  one  has  had  the  courage  to 
write  two  large  volumes  on  systematic  pedagogy.  They  are 
satisfied  with  presenting  the  different  chapters  and  letting  the 
reader  systematize  for  himself.  In  a  word,  the  American 
product  lacks  the  finish  and  symmetry  that  comes  from  the  more 
rigid  presentation  in  Germany.  It  is  possible  that  the 
German  has  that  characteristic  because  he  is  often  saturated 
with  the  metaphysics. 

We  have  seen  that  from  the  outset  the  metaphysical  basis 
was  neglected  in  America.  The  American  is  satisfied  and  has 
faith  in  experience.  Dr.  Harris  once  said,  "I  am  glad  that  our 
friends  are  pushing  the  Herbartian  pedagogy,  but  when  they 
reject  the  Herbartian  philosophy  they  do  not  put  anything 
in  its  place."  All  that  one  can  say  in  reply  is  that  Herbartian- 
ism  grew  up  in  America  in  a  philosophical  atmosphere  made 
chiefly  by  such  men  as  James  and  Dewey.  The  doctrine  of 
pragmatism  has  been  in  the  air.  It  preaches  usefulness  and 
workableness  as  a  test  and  proof  of  a  theory.  It  teaches  that 
ideas  are  always  directed  toward  activity  and  that  mental  life 
is  teleological.  To  an  article  by  Pierce  in  the  Popular  Science 
Monthly  in  1875,  is  credited  the  beginning  of  the  movement. 
It  is  particularly  in  the  writings  of  William  James  that  prag- 
matism has  exerted  a  wide  influence.  It  appears,  if  not  under 
that  name,  at  least  prominently  in  his  "Talks  to  Teachers." 
Here  the  pragmatic  method  finds  application  to  educational 
thinking.  Now,  either  pragmatism  has  taught  Herbartians 
how  to  get  along  without  a  philosophy,  or  if  pragmatism  be  a 
philosophy,  then  it  is  the  unconscious  basis  of  American  peda- 
gogy- 

The  remark  about  American  Herbartianism  developing 
in  an  atmosphere  of  pragmatism  is  suggestive.  We  arrive  at 
something  more  tangible  when  we  call  to  mind  the  great  ac- 


62       THE   DOCTRINES   OF   HERBART   IN   THE   UNITED    STATES 

tivity  in  psychology,  especially  child  and  experimental,  in 
America.  This  activity  has  eclipsed  the  philosophical.  The 
American  Herbartians  put  their  trust  in  psychology.  "On 
these  few  large  points  in  psychology,  e.  g.  apperception  and  in- 
duction, pedagogy  rests"  (Fourth  year  Book  115).  The 
Herbartian  educational  principles  have  had  a  new  grounding 
in  psychology.  The  American  philosophy  which  most  in- 
fluenced Herbartians,  encouraged  a  neglect  of  any  metaphysi- 
cal basis.  All  the  doctrines — interest,  apperception,  con- 
centration— have  profited  from  the  investigations  in  psycholo- 
gy and  child  study.  Feelings,  instinct  and  will  have  been 
given  a  larger  place,  relative  to  the  intellect,  than  Herbart 
ever  dreamed  of.  One  of  the  staunchest  of  Herbartians, 
Professor  Frank  McMurry,  says,  "The  Froebehan  view  of 
psychology  is  better,  and  this,  back  of  the  Herbartian  peda- 
gogy, makes  the  child  a  greater  factor"  (Fourth  Year 
Book  114).  The  active  productive  elements  have  been  em- 
phasized. It  may  be  said  that  German  Herbartianism  ap- 
pears intellectualistic,  but  that  in  America  it  is  voluntaristic. 
In  fact,  the  psychological  basis  is  entirely  new,  tho  without 
doing  violence  to  fundamental  pedagogical  doctrines.  New 
discoveries  and  new  truths  have  been  read  into  the  inherited 
system.  There  is  no  better  authority  for  the  privilege  than 
Herbart's  own  words  in  speaking  of  Schwartz's  Pedagogy. 
"When  in  an  earnest  writer  full  of  heat  and  intellect  we  seem 
to  miss  something,  it  is  competent  for  him  to  reply  that  if  we 
will  only  let  his  work  act  upon  us  a  longer  time,  if  we  will  read 
ourselves  into  it,  if  we  will  use  it  anew  and  repeatedly  on  a  va- 
riety of  occasions,  much  will  be  found  in  it  that  is  not  set  down 
in  so  many  words"     (55 :287) . 

It  is  worth  while  to  have  a  framework  into  which  one  may 
read  new  truths.  The  product  after  this  process  may  con- 
tinue to  bear  the  old  name.  This  elasticity  of  Herbartianism 
has  saved  it  from  destruction.  Its  elasticity  is  what  makes  it  a 
good  educational  creed.  While,  on  the  one  hand,  we  are  not 
bound  to  an  outgrown  shell,  on  the  other,  we  have  a  scheme  in 
which  to  see  the  educational  problem  as  a  whole.  To  have 
kept  the  whole  process  of  education  before  the  mind  of  the 
teacher,  has  been  an  inestimable  service  to  the  cause  of  edu- 
cation. Seeing  every  act  of  teaching  in  relation  to  the  whole 
educational  process,  is  the  only  means  by  which  teaching  is 
kept  from  becoming  drudgery.  American  Herbartianism  has 
shared  in,  and  also  contributed  to,  a  tendency  in  educational 
thinking  away  from  the  formulation  of  rules  of  procedure  to 
the  formulation  of  large  principles  and  to  a  point  of  view  over- 
looking the  whole  field  (O'Shea,  Education  as  Adjustment 
.52). 

All  the  facts  in  the  course  of  American  Herbartianism 


THE   DOCTRINES   OP   HERBART   IN   THE    UNITED    STATES       63 

have  emphasized  the  free  position  taken  by  the  adherents,  and 
in  no  sense  whatever  can  the  charge  be  substantiated  that  the 
Herbartians  have  been  servile  followers.  No  other  members 
have  been  more  alert  in  appreciating  and  making  use  of  the 
researches  of  investigators  in  child  study,  experimental  peda- 
gogy, psychology,  and  the  social  sciences.  The  advice  of  Col. 
Parker  has  been  followed:  "Don't  be  followers  of  Herbart:  be 
followers  of  his  spirit"  (N.  E.  A.  1895:549).  It  is  greatly  to 
the  credit  of  the  followers  that,  without  being  ambitious  for 
originality — and  they  have  not  lacked  in  it — they  have  been 
willing  to  turn  the  results  of  their  research  and  investigations 
to  the  credit  of  the  great  founder. 

Even  if  there  were  no  followers,  the  service  of  Herbart 
would  still  be  unmistakable.  The  stimulation  to  thought  has 
been  immeasurable  to  all,  whether  Herbartian  or  not.  Few 
have  escaped  his  influence.  Moreover,  it  furnished  the  themes 
and  outlines  for  thinking  for  several  of  the  most  fruitful 
years,  until  those  principles  became  common  property,  for 
Herbartianism  can  be  recognized  in  many  who  have  never 
studied  Herbart,  but  have  caught  it  thru  imitation  of  those 
working  near  them.  What  President  Butler  said  of  the  Com- 
mittee of  Ten  and  of  the  doctrine  of  correlation  may  be  ex- 
tended much  farther.  The  vast  majority  who  have  a  theory 
have  Herbartianism  or  an  Herbartian  foundation  to  it. 
Much  of  the  educational  thought  today  is  conducted  in  terms 
•©f  interest,  apperception,  correlation,  culture  epochs,  circle  of 
.thought, — terms  all  but  unknown  in  their  present  sense  in  the 
eighties.  If  Herbartians  had  done  no  more  than  to  introduce 
these  terms  and  to  stimulate  thought  about  them,  it  would 
be  the  greatest  service  done  in  a  generation. 


64       THE   DOCTRINES   OF   HERBART   IN   THE   UNITED    STATES 


Reference  List 

(  1)     Allen,  Arthur:  Social  Recapitulation    Educational  Review,  18; 

344-352. 
(  2)     Adams,  J.:  Herbartian  Psychology  Applied  to  Education,  Boston, 

1898. 
(  3)     Adams,  J. :  Relation  of  the  School  Studies  to  Moral  Training,  Third 

Year  Book  of  the  National  Herbart  Society,  73-100. 
(  4)     Baldwin,  M. :  Mental  Development  in  the  Child  and  the  Race,  N.  Y. 

1898. 
(  5)     Barnard,  Henry:  German  Pedagogy,  Hartford,  1876. 
(  6)     Blake,  Harriet  M. :  Education,  17,  309-313. 
(  7)     Bolton,  F.  E. :  Recapitulation,  Journal  of  Pedagogy,  16,  37. 
(  8)     Brown,  E.  E. :  Notes  on  the  Theory  of  the  Culture  Epochs,  Second 

Year  Book,  81-88. 
(  9)     BMt\er,^.M..:The  M eaning  of  Education,  ^.Y.,\^Ob. 

(10)  Chancellor,  W.  E. :  Education  for  Social  Control,  Proceedings  and 

Addresses  of  the  National  Education  Association,  1901,  619- 
626. 

(11)  Compayre,  G. :  Herbart  and  Education  by  Instruction,  tr.  by  Find- 

ley,  N.  Y.,  1906. 

(12)  Darroch,  A. :  Herbart  and  the  Herbartian  Theory  of  Education,  A 

Criticism,  London,  1903. 

(13)  DeGarmo,  C. :  A  Basis  for  Ethical  Training  in  the  Elementary 

Schools,  N.  E.  A.,  1891,  170-177. 

(14)  Coordination  of  Studies,  N.  E.  A.,  1895,  87-96. 

(15)  Essentials  of  Method, 'B\oormngton,l%SQ. 

(16)  German  Contribution  to  the  Co-ordination  of  Studies,  Ed.  Rev. 

4,  422-437. 

(17)  German  System  of  Normal  Schools,  N.  E.  A. ,  1887,  484-492. 

(18)  Introductory  Remarks  to  Pressing  Problems,  First  Year  Book, 

3-25. 

(19)  Herbart  and  the  Herbartians,  N.  Y. ,  1895. 

(20)  Herbartian  System  of  Pedagogics,  Ed.  Rev.,  1,  33-45;  244-252; 

453-462. 

(21)  Interest  and  Education,  N.  Y. ,  1902. 

(22)  Letter  in  Reply  to  Harris,  Ed. ,  16,  240-242. 

(23)  Place  and  Function  of  the  Model  School,  N.  E.  A. ,  1883,  47-54. 

(24)  Present  Status  of  the  Doctrine  of  Interest,  Second  Year  Book, 

141-144. 

(25)  Relation  of  Instruction  to  Will  Training,  N.  E.  A.,  1890,  118- 

125. 

(26)  Social  Aspects  of  Moral  Education,  Third  Year  Book,  35-57. 

(27)  Working  Basis  for  the  Correlation  of  Studies,  Ed.  Rev.,  5,  451- 

466. 

(28)  Dewey,  J.:  Ethical  Principles  Underlying  Education,  Third  Year 

Book,  7-34. 


THE    DOCTRINES   OF   HERBART    IN    THE    UNITED    STATES       65 


(29)  Interpretation  of  the  Culture  Epoch  Theory,  Second  Year  Book, 

89-95. 

(30)  Interest  as  Related  to  Will,  Second  Supplement  to  the  First 

Year  Book. 

(31)  My  Educational  Creed,  Lang,  Educational  Creeds,  N.  Y.,  1898, 

5-19. 

(32)  School  and  Society,  Chicago,  1900. 

(33)  Dorpfeldt:  The  Connection  between  Thought  and  Memory,  tr.  bj- 

Lukens ;  Int.  by  G.  S.  Hall,  Boston,  18,  1895. 

(34)  Dow,  G.  E. :  Correlation  of  Studies,  Ed.  1 7,  1 81  - 1 83. 

(35)  Dutton :  Social  Phases  of  Education,  N .  Y. ,  1 899. 

(36)  Felkin,  H.  M.  and  E.:  An  Introduction  to  HerbarVs  Science  and 

Practice  of  Education,  Boston,  1900. 

(38)  Felmly,  D. :  The  Culttire  Epochs,  Second  Year  Book,  1 26-129. 

(39)  Fick,  H.  H. :  Education  of  the  Heart,  N.  E.  A.,  1883,  25-35.. 

(40)  Findly,  J.  J.:  The  Scope  of  the  Science  of  Education,    Ed.   Rev., 

14,  236. 

(41)  Principles  of  Class  Room  Teaching,  London,  1902. 

(42)  Frick   and   Friedel:    The    Value  of   the   Didactic   Principles  of 

Herbart — Ziller — Stoy,  Supplement  to  Third  Year  Book,  153- 
175. 

(43)  Galbreath,  L.  K.:  A  Critical  View  of  the  Culture  Epoch  Theory, 

Second  Year  Book,  107-116. 

(44)  Gilbert,  C.  B.:  Some  Suggestions  to  Herbartian  Teachers,  Ed.  15, 

75-80. 

(45)  The  New  Education,  Ed.  16,  95-103 ;  151-160-. 

(46)  Hall,  G.  S. :  Chairs  of  Pedagogy  in  our  Higher  Institutions  of  Learn- 

ing, N.  E.  A.,. Department  of  Superintendence,  1882,  35-44. 

(47)  Harris,  W.  T.  and  others:  A  Course  of  Study  from  the  Primary 

Schools  to  the  University,  N.  E.  A.,  1876,  58-67. 

(48)  Harris,  Soldan,  Halland  others:  Is  there  a  Science  of  Education!, 

N.  E.  A..  National  Council,  1884,  49-55. 

(49)  Harris,  W.  T. :  Herbart' s  Unmoral  Education,  Ed.,  16,  178-181. 

(50)  Five  Coordinate  Groups  of  Studies,  N.  E.  A. ,  1896,  287-296. 

(51)  Correlation,  Report  of  U.  S.  Commissioner  of  Education,  1893, 

XXXIV-XL. 

(52)  Report  of  the  Committee  of  Fifteen,  U.  S.  Com.  of  Ed.,  1893- '4, 

489-541,  alsoin.N.  E.  A.,  1895,  287-394. 

(53)  The  Study  of  Arrested  Development,  Ed. ,  20,  453,  460. 
(64)     Hayward,  F.  H. :  The  Secret  of  Herbart,  London,  1904. 

(55)  Herbart,  J.  F. :  The  A.  B.C.  of  Sense  Perception,  and  Minor  Peda- 

gogical works,  tr.  by  W.  J.  Eckoff,  with  notes,  N.  Y.,  1896. 

(56)  Application  of  Psychology  to  the  Science  of  Education,  tr.  by 

Beatric  Mullinger,  London,  1898. 

(57)  The  Science  of  Education  and  Aesthetic  Revelation  of  the  World, 
tr.  by  Henry  M.  and  Emma  Felkin,  London,  1892,  Boston, 
1895. 

(68)         Psychology,  tr.  bv  Miss  M.  K.  Smith,  N.  Y. ,  1892. 


66       THE   DOCTRINES    OF   HERBART   IN   THE    UNITED    STATES 

(59)  Outlines  of  Educational  Doctrine,  tr.  by  Lange;  annotated  by 

Professor  DcGarmo,  N.  Y.,  1901. 

(61)  Hervey,  W ,  L, :  The  Study  of  Education  at  the  German  Universities, 

Ed.  Rev.,  16,  220-232. 

(62)  Hinsdale,  B.  A. :  Notes  on  Foreign  Influence  on  Education  in  the 

U.  5.     Report  U.  S.  Com.  of  Ed.,  1897-'8,  591-629. 

(63)  The  Dogma  of  Formal  Discipline,  N.  E.  A. ,  1894,  625-635. 

(64)  The  Colossal  Man  Theory  of  Education,  Second  Year  Book,  117- 

125. 

(65)  Holmes,  M.  J. :  Historical  Sketch  of  the  Herbart  Society,  Sixth  Year 

Book  of  the  National  Society  for  the  Scientific  Study  of  Edu- 
cation, 68-72. 

(66)  Hoose,  J. :  On  the  Educational  Value  of  Each  of  the  Common  School 

Studies,  N.  E.  A.,  1885,  224-234. 

(67)  Payne    and    Brooks    Report  of  the  Committee  on  Educational 

Values  of  Common  School  Studies,  N.  E.  A.,  1886,  403-420 

(68)  Howerth,  J.  N. :  The  Development  of  the  Social  Aim-  in  Education, 

Jr.  of  Ped.  12,  230-243;  13,  102-109;  169-180. 

(69)  Jackman,  W .  S. ,  The  Correlation  of  Mathematics,  Ed.  Rev.  25,  249 

-264. 

(70)  James,  W. :  Psychology,  Briefer  Course,  1892. 

(71)  Principles  of  Psychology,  N.  Y.,  1890. 

(72)  Pragmatism,  N.  Y.,  1907. 

(73)  Talks  to  Teachers  on  Psychology,  N.  Y. ,  1 899. 

(74)  Jenks,  J.  N. :  Social  Basis  of  Education,  Ed.  Rev.  25,  442-463. 

(75)  Lange,  Apperception,  tr.  by  Herbart  Club,  Boston,  1892. 

(76)  Lindner:  Empirical  Psychology,  tr.  by  DeGarmo,  N.  Y. ,  1892. 

(77)  Liikens,  H.  T. :  Point  of  Difference  between  Race  and  Individual 

Development,  Second  Year  Book,  56-70. 

(78)  The  Vital  Question  in  the  Curriculum,  Ed.  18,  19-29. 

(79)  McMurry,  C.  A.:  The  Elements  of  General  Method  based  on  the 

Principles  of  Herbart,  Bloomington,  1892. 

(80)  How  to  Conduct  the  Recitation,  1 896. 

(81)  Method  of  the  Recitation,  N.  Y.,  1903. 

(82)  Pioneer  History  Stories,  1 89 1 . 

(83)  A  Reply  to  Dr.  White's  Paper  against  Coordination,  Second 

Year  Book,  48-52. 

(84)  Herbart  and  the  Course  of  Study,  N.  E.  A. ,  1895,  470-481 . 

(85)  The  Culture  Epochs,  Second  Year  Book,  96-106. 

(86)  McMurry,  F. :  Value  of  Herbartian  Pedagogy  for  Normal  Schools, 

N.E.  A.,  1892,  421-433. 

(87)  Concentration,  First  Year  Book,  27-69. 

(88)  Bases  of  Omission  in  Courses  of  Study,  N.  E.  A.,  1904,  194-202. 

(89)  With  C.  A.  McMurry :  The  Elements  of  General  Method. 

(90)  Ostermann:  Interest  in  its  Relation  to  Pedagogy,  tr.  and  edited  by 

Shaw,  N.Y.,  1899. 

(91)  Parker,  F.  W.:  Talks  on  Pedagogics,  an  outline  of  the  Theory  of 

Concentration,  N.  Y.,  1894. 


:  :• 


THE   DOCTRINES    OF    HERBART   IN   THE    UNITED    STATES       67 

(92)  Page:  Theory  and  Practice  of  Teaching,  First  Edition  1847,  edited 

by  W.  H.  t'ayne,  N.  Y.,  1885. 

(93)  Payne,  Joseph :  lectures  on  the  Science  and  Art  of  Education,  1883. 

(94)  Payne,  W .  H. :  Contributions  to  the  Science  of  Education,  1 887. 

(95)  Rein,  W.:  Education  in  Germany,  Report  of  U.  S.  Com.  of  Ed. 
1894-1895,  322-329. 

(90)  Outlines  of  Pedagogics,  tr.  by  C.  C.  and  Ida  J.  Van  Liew,  Syra- 

cuse, 1895. 

(97)  A.  Pickel,  E.  Scheller:  Theorie  U.  Praxis  des  Volkschulunter- 
richts.  Das  erste  Schuljahr,  Seventh  edition,  Leipzig,  190. 

(98)  Rooper,  T.  G. :  A  pperception,  or  a  Pot  of  Green  Feathers,  Syracuse, 

1897. 

(99)  Schaeffer,  N.  C. :  Books  on  Pedagogy,  N.  E.  A.,  1888,  281-289. 

(100)  Schmidt,  Karl :  Journal  of  Speculative  Philosophy,  April,  1 876. 

(101)  Scott,  Isora:  Pragmatism  in  Educational  Theory,  Jr.  of  Ped.  19, 

42-61. 

(102)  Seeley,  L. :  Culture  Epochs,  Second  Year  Book,  71-80. 

(103)  Spencer,  H. :  Education. 

(104)  Soldan,  F.  L. :  Outlines  of  a  Philosophy  of  Education,  N.  E.  A. 

1887,  74-79. 

(105)  Steams,  J.  W. :  The  Public  Schools  and  Morality,  N.  E.  A.,  1885, 

81-90. 

(106)  The  Correlation  of  Subjects,  N.  E.  A. ,  1890,  200-208. 

(107)  Ufer,  Chr. :  Introduction  to  the  Pedagogy  of  Herbart,  tr.  by  J.  C. 

Zinsen ;  edited  by  DeGarmo,  Boston,  1896. 

(108)  Van  Liew,  C.  C. :  Training  for  Citizenship,  Third  Year  Book, 

117-122. 

(109)  Tlie    Educational    Tlieory    of    the  Culture  Epochs,  First  Year 

Book,  67-113. 

(110)  .4     Reply    to    Some  Comments  on  the  Culture  Epochs  Theory, 

Second  Year  Book,  130-140. 

(111)  .4   Review  of  the  "Method  of  the  Recitation'',  Ed.  Rev.,  1 5,:  188- 

193. 

(112)  Vom  .AmerikanischenErziehungsivesen,  Zeitschrift  fuer  Philoso- 

phieu.  Paedagogik,  1894,  375. 

(113)  Neue    Erscheinungen    aus    Paed.,  Lit.   der  V.   S.  von  N.  A., 

Paedagogische  Studien,  14,  93-109. 

(114)  Welton,  J.  A.:  Synthesis  of  Herbart  and  Froebel,  Ed.  Rev.,  25, 

109-122. 

(115)  White,  E.  A.:  Moral  Training  in  the  Public  Schools,  N.  E.  A., 

1896,  128-148. 

(116)  Isolation  and  Unification  as  Basis  of  Courses  of  Study,  Report 
of  U.  S.  Com.  of  Ed.  1895-'6,  929-933. 

(117)  Woodbridge,  F.  J.  E. :  Pragmatism  and  Education,  Ed.  Rev.,  34, 

227-240. 


>*  'c 


